Before hanging my spurs, I was at the very top of the industry. The absolute best coins I ever saw didn't have jelly beans. Only once they go to retail sellers, go on the block, or go to collectors do they get a sticker. I've seen dealers you all know "throw coins at the wall" up to a dozen times seeing "if they stick" and finally get the grade they're fishing for. Not to mention that one of the highest paid people in the industry, does very little aside from selecting coins from the endless stream that are destined for higher grades. A few of you know to whom I refer. Coins is an interesting, and often tricky & messy business.
"He who loves silver will not be satisfied with silver, nor he who loves abundance, with increase. This also is vanity.
When goods increase, they increase who eat them -- so what profit have the owners, except to see them with their eyes?"
"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: fear God and keep His commandments, for this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether good or evil."
"Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father but by Me." http://www.youtube.com/user/alohabibleprophecy/videos
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
Photos are a sign of the times, the Internet / online sharing times. I'd consider professional-quality photos today (TrueViews or one's own) similar to Capital Plastics holders in the 1960s - 1980s. Same level of ego.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
I didn't take you to mean it bad but I got the impression you think a non-top Registry set is different from a Whitman album. To me they are the same. To me, the same "ego" for building a non-top Registry set is akin to building a Whitman album to share, e.g. with your family or at your local coin club.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Here's another way to ask your question:
Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
As for the $30 per coin, that just comes down to how much discretionary wealth collectors have.
Oh, I think even a top Registry set is ego-driven. But the expense can be justified for those coins.
I agree. Some collectors like to show off their stuff, no matter how it is housed. But the question raised here was the extreme cost of the slabbing relative to the value of what was in the slab. A $35 Dansco album with BU cents in it makes financial sense and doesn't require as much ego to over-rule your financial sense. The same coins in $1200 worth of slabs requires a lot of ego over-ruling your financial sense.
And, again, I don't really care what you collect or how you collect it. I don't care if you spend $10,000 for $100 worth of coins. That is my "it's a hobby, not an investment" mantra in a nutshell. Do whatever you enjoy and damn the costs.
But someone raised the issue of slabbing inexpensive coins and @MFeld provided some reasons. I added the ego reason as I see it as a major factor in the slab part of the market.
Have you ever been at a coin club and seen someone showing off their new slab with the excitement of a 10-year-old? And you are sitting there thinking "$10 coin in a $35 holder" while trying to be as excited for them as they are for themselves.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Quality pictures are extremely important to the younger generation of collectors that primarily deal thru the internet, ex. Instagram. To them, high-quality pictures add value, a way to demonstratively display their collection online.
By the way, the need to "demonstratively display" can come under the category of "ego".
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
Photos are a sign of the times, the Internet / online sharing times. I'd consider professional-quality photos today (TrueViews or one's own) similar to Capital Plastics holders in the 1960s - 1980s. Same level of ego.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
I didn't take you to mean it bad but I got the impression you think a non-top Registry set is different from a Whitman album. To me they are the same. To me, the same "ego" for building a non-top Registry set is akin to building a Whitman album to share, e.g. with your family or at your local coin club.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Here's another way to ask your question:
Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
As for the $30 per coin, that just comes down to how much discretionary wealth collectors have.
Oh, I think even a top Registry set is ego-driven. But the expense can be justified for those coins.
I agree. Some collectors like to show off their stuff, no matter how it is housed. But the question raised here was the extreme cost of the slabbing relative to the value of what was in the slab. A $35 Dansco album with BU cents in it makes financial sense and doesn't require as much ego to over-rule your financial sense. The same coins in $1200 worth of slabs requires a lot of ego over-ruling your financial sense.
And, again, I don't really care what you collect or how you collect it. I don't care if you spend $10,000 for $100 worth of coins. That is my "it's a hobby, not an investment" mantra in a nutshell. Do whatever you enjoy and damn the costs.
But someone raised the issue of slabbing inexpensive coins and @MFeld provided some reasons. I added the ego reason as I see it as a major factor in the slab part of the market.
Have you ever been at a coin club and seen someone showing off their new slab with the excitement of a 10-year-old? And you are sitting there thinking "$10 coin in a $35 holder" while trying to be as excited for them as they are for themselves.
I think it's less having an ego than having too much money
For example, I just purchased a slabbed Neil Armstrong piece for 10000% over a raw example which are plentiful enough. I haven't shared it at all. Rather than bragging about it, I wonder if people will think I'm crazy if I share it! Ego or budget?
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
Photos are a sign of the times, the Internet / online sharing times. I'd consider professional-quality photos today (TrueViews or one's own) similar to Capital Plastics holders in the 1960s - 1980s. Same level of ego.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
I didn't take you to mean it bad but I got the impression you think a non-top Registry set is different from a Whitman album. To me they are the same. To me, the same "ego" for building a non-top Registry set is akin to building a Whitman album to share, e.g. with your family or at your local coin club.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Here's another way to ask your question:
Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
As for the $30 per coin, that just comes down to how much discretionary wealth collectors have.
Oh, I think even a top Registry set is ego-driven. But the expense can be justified for those coins.
I agree. Some collectors like to show off their stuff, no matter how it is housed. But the question raised here was the extreme cost of the slabbing relative to the value of what was in the slab. A $35 Dansco album with BU cents in it makes financial sense and doesn't require as much ego to over-rule your financial sense. The same coins in $1200 worth of slabs requires a lot of ego over-ruling your financial sense.
And, again, I don't really care what you collect or how you collect it. I don't care if you spend $10,000 for $100 worth of coins. That is my "it's a hobby, not an investment" mantra in a nutshell. Do whatever you enjoy and damn the costs.
But someone raised the issue of slabbing inexpensive coins and @MFeld provided some reasons. I added the ego reason as I see it as a major factor in the slab part of the market.
Have you ever been at a coin club and seen someone showing off their new slab with the excitement of a 10-year-old? And you are sitting there thinking "$10 coin in a $35 holder" while trying to be as excited for them as they are for themselves.
I think it's less having an ego than having too much money
Sometimes. But, without naming names, we had a member of this forum who referred to himself as cash-poor talking about sending in a single inexpensive coin at a cost of close to $70 to get it slabbed.
But again, I don't care how anyone spends their money.
@jmlanzaf said:
Sometimes. But, without naming names, we had a member of this forum who referred to himself as cash-poor talking about sending in a single inexpensive coin at a cost of close to $70 to get it slabbed.
@jmlanzaf said:
Sometimes. But, without naming names, we had a member of this forum who referred to himself as cash-poor talking about sending in a single inexpensive coin at a cost of close to $70 to get it slabbed.
Do you think that's ego?
He said he likes to slab them, so yes I think that puts him in the group that considers it an accomplishment to get something "made". [Like we're the gods of plastic or something, LOL.]
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
Photos are a sign of the times, the Internet / online sharing times. I'd consider professional-quality photos today (TrueViews or one's own) similar to Capital Plastics holders in the 1960s - 1980s. Same level of ego.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
I didn't take you to mean it bad but I got the impression you think a non-top Registry set is different from a Whitman album. To me they are the same. To me, the same "ego" for building a non-top Registry set is akin to building a Whitman album to share, e.g. with your family or at your local coin club.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Here's another way to ask your question:
Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
As for the $30 per coin, that just comes down to how much discretionary wealth collectors have.
Oh, I think even a top Registry set is ego-driven. But the expense can be justified for those coins.
I agree. Some collectors like to show off their stuff, no matter how it is housed. But the question raised here was the extreme cost of the slabbing relative to the value of what was in the slab. A $35 Dansco album with BU cents in it makes financial sense and doesn't require as much ego to over-rule your financial sense. The same coins in $1200 worth of slabs requires a lot of ego over-ruling your financial sense.
And, again, I don't really care what you collect or how you collect it. I don't care if you spend $10,000 for $100 worth of coins. That is my "it's a hobby, not an investment" mantra in a nutshell. Do whatever you enjoy and damn the costs.
But someone raised the issue of slabbing inexpensive coins and @MFeld provided some reasons. I added the ego reason as I see it as a major factor in the slab part of the market.
Have you ever been at a coin club and seen someone showing off their new slab with the excitement of a 10-year-old? And you are sitting there thinking "$10 coin in a $35 holder" while trying to be as excited for them as they are for themselves.
I think it's less having an ego than having too much money
For example, I just purchased a slabbed Neil Armstrong piece for 10000% over a raw example which are plentiful enough. I haven't shared it at all. Rather than bragging about it, I wonder if people will think I'm crazy if I share it! Ego or budget?
Go ahead and share your new coin. I'd love to see it. There's no requirement to tell anyone how much you paid for it. In fact, the vast major of coins shown here make no mention of the price paid.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
Photos are a sign of the times, the Internet / online sharing times. I'd consider professional-quality photos today (TrueViews or one's own) similar to Capital Plastics holders in the 1960s - 1980s. Same level of ego.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
I didn't take you to mean it bad but I got the impression you think a non-top Registry set is different from a Whitman album. To me they are the same. To me, the same "ego" for building a non-top Registry set is akin to building a Whitman album to share, e.g. with your family or at your local coin club.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Here's another way to ask your question:
Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
As for the $30 per coin, that just comes down to how much discretionary wealth collectors have.
Oh, I think even a top Registry set is ego-driven. But the expense can be justified for those coins.
I agree. Some collectors like to show off their stuff, no matter how it is housed. But the question raised here was the extreme cost of the slabbing relative to the value of what was in the slab. A $35 Dansco album with BU cents in it makes financial sense and doesn't require as much ego to over-rule your financial sense. The same coins in $1200 worth of slabs requires a lot of ego over-ruling your financial sense.
And, again, I don't really care what you collect or how you collect it. I don't care if you spend $10,000 for $100 worth of coins. That is my "it's a hobby, not an investment" mantra in a nutshell. Do whatever you enjoy and damn the costs.
But someone raised the issue of slabbing inexpensive coins and @MFeld provided some reasons. I added the ego reason as I see it as a major factor in the slab part of the market.
Have you ever been at a coin club and seen someone showing off their new slab with the excitement of a 10-year-old? And you are sitting there thinking "$10 coin in a $35 holder" while trying to be as excited for them as they are for themselves.
I think it's less having an ego than having too much money
For example, I just purchased a slabbed Neil Armstrong piece for 10000% over a raw example which are plentiful enough. I haven't shared it at all. Rather than bragging about it, I wonder if people will think I'm crazy if I share it! Ego or budget?
Go ahead and share your new coin. I'd love to see it. There's no requirement to tell anyone how much you paid for it. In fact, the vast major of coins shown here make no mention of the price paid.
It's on Heritage
High prices are actually par for the course for the Neil Armstrong pieces as even slabbed Boy Scout Troop badges and UN visitor pins have been selling for a lot of money.
I'll probably post it some time. I'm not overly worried about it, I just don't think there will be a lot of interest in it
@Gazes I do not know where the price point exactly is. For the last 2 or 3 years I have not been buying coins as other concerns have been more concerning. The last 'beaned' coin I bought was a 194X PCGS MS65 FB Mercury Dime that cost $18. Not sure how the sticker helped this one.
@jmlanzaf You say I should look around more but then you make my point for me. The large auction houses do not deal with what many would see as the largest part of the market, they are concerned with top end coins and collections. I watched a Sacagawea dollar in a Heritage auction that bid up to 7 gran simply because of the high grade. I do not for a moment think this is the major part of the market, but a small niche
I do not belittle CAC I just do not swim in the sea where it matters much. If you need to have only the best than I can see where it is very important. If you buy the best you can afford and what pleases you and one of the favorite coins in your collection is a raw good 1803 half cent then CAC makes little difference to you.
So, as I tried to say before, outside of this, and other online forums, I have seen a great indifference.
@Moxie15 said: @Gazes I do not know where the price point exactly is. For the last 2 or 3 years I have not been buying coins as other concerns have been more concerning. The last 'beaned' coin I bought was a 194X PCGS MS65 FB Mercury Dime that cost $18. Not sure how the sticker helped this one.
@jmlanzaf You say I should look around more but then you make my point for me. The large auction houses do not deal with what many would see as the largest part of the market, they are concerned with top end coins and collections. I watched a Sacagawea dollar in a Heritage auction that bid up to 7 gran simply because of the high grade. I do not for a moment think this is the major part of the market, but a small niche
I do not belittle CAC I just do not swim in the sea where it matters much. If you need to have only the best than I can see where it is very important. If you buy the best you can afford and what pleases you and one of the favorite coins in your collection is a raw good 1803 half cent then CAC makes little difference to you.
So, as I tried to say before, outside of this, and other online forums, I have seen a great indifference.
I believe that CAC has affected coin prices but I don't accept that it's an easily measured difference. examples can be pointed out but the hidden truth in that should be obvious --- it can't be known how that same coin at that same time would have sold without the CAC sticker. another aspect of the CAC affect has been touched vaguely: if CAC coins are drawing buyers and raising prices, what is the effect on prices of coins which have either been sent to CAC and failed or not been sent??
I would ask why is it seen as good for the Hobby if some areas benefit at the expense of other areas??
@keets said:
I believe that CAC has affected coin prices but I don't accept that it's an easily measured difference. examples can be pointed out but the hidden truth in that should be obvious --- it can't be known how that same coin at that same time would have sold without the CAC sticker. another aspect of the CAC affect has been touched vaguely: if CAC coins are drawing buyers and raising prices, what is the affect on prices of coins which have either been sent to CAC and failed or not been sent??
I would ask why is it seen as good for the Hobby if some areas benefit at the expense of other areas??
This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby.
This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby.
so what do you think?? send via PM if you so choose.
@keets said:
**This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby**.
so what do you think?? send via PM if you so choose.
In the past, some dealers have engaged in unsavory practices to abuse TPG grading which exacerbated grading inconsistencies which had to be addressed. For example, the practice of "slamming" on-site graders. CAC is one way to address this which is now even recognized by PCGS with a Set Registry.
So my impression is that one benefit is to address undesirable dealer behavior.
@keets said:
**This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby**.
so what do you think?? send via PM if you so choose.
In the past, some dealers have engaged in unsavory practices to abuse TPG grading which exacerbated grading inconsistencies which had to be addressed. For example, the practice of "slamming" on-site graders. CAC is one way to address this which is now even recognized by PCGS with a Set Registry.
So my impression is that it is beneficial to address undesirable dealer behavior.
@keets said:
**This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby**.
so what do you think?? send via PM if you so choose.
In the past, some dealers have engaged in unsavory practices to abuse TPG grading which exacerbated grading inconsistencies which had to be addressed. For example, the practice of "slamming" on-site graders. CAC is one way to address this which is now even recognized by PCGS with a Set Registry.
So my impression is that it is beneficial to address undesirable dealer behavior.
What effect do you think CAC has had on "unsavory practices" of some dealers?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@keets said:
**This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby**.
so what do you think?? send via PM if you so choose.
In the past, some dealers have engaged in unsavory practices to abuse TPG grading which exacerbated grading inconsistencies which had to be addressed. For example, the practice of "slamming" on-site graders. CAC is one way to address this which is now even recognized by PCGS with a Set Registry.
So my impression is that it is beneficial to address undesirable dealer behavior.
@keets said:
**This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby**.
so what do you think?? send via PM if you so choose.
In the past, some dealers have engaged in unsavory practices to abuse TPG grading which exacerbated grading inconsistencies which had to be addressed. For example, the practice of "slamming" on-site graders. CAC is one way to address this which is now even recognized by PCGS with a Set Registry.
So my impression is that it is beneficial to address undesirable dealer behavior.
What effect do you think CAC has had on "unsavory practices" of some dealers?
I don't know and I'm not sure that it matters. What matters is if the end result of the undesirable behavior receives an upgrade and a CAC bean. My impression is that is that it won't often enough to make CAC relevant.
@Moxie15 said: @Gazes I do not know where the price point exactly is. For the last 2 or 3 years I have not been buying coins as other concerns have been more concerning. The last 'beaned' coin I bought was a 194X PCGS MS65 FB Mercury Dime that cost $18. Not sure how the sticker helped this one.
@jmlanzaf You say I should look around more but then you make my point for me. The large auction houses do not deal with what many would see as the largest part of the market, they are concerned with top end coins and collections. I watched a Sacagawea dollar in a Heritage auction that bid up to 7 gran simply because of the high grade. I do not for a moment think this is the major part of the market, but a small niche
I do not belittle CAC I just do not swim in the sea where it matters much. If you need to have only the best than I can see where it is very important. If you buy the best you can afford and what pleases you and one of the favorite coins in your collection is a raw good 1803 half cent then CAC makes little difference to you.
So, as I tried to say before, outside of this, and other online forums, I have seen a great indifference.
I'll say it again: Look around more.
Great collections sells a lot of coins for under $50. CAC coins show a price bump. eBay CAC coins sell for more. It's not just Heritage and Stack's and Legends.
Maybe on Craig's list no one cares?
Obviously a 10% price bump on a $15 coin isn't a lot, but it still exists. To argue that CAC isn't a force in the market is willful ignorance.
Are there people who don't know or care about CAC? Yes. But there are also people who think an SGS MS70 is an MS70 coin.
It is not simply people on this forum. To argue that is simply ignorant and every coin venue from coin shows to eBay to major auction houses see the affect.
@ms71 said:
I think the statements that a collector "gets a thrill" or "gets psychological boost" out of making a slab are the 4,671st and 4,672nd variants in the endless effort to disparage collectors whose method of collecting doesn't comport with one's own. Such disparagement of whatever may increase any collector's enjoyment of the hobby, however cleverly veiled, is beyond my ability to understand.
Incorrect.
It is a verifiable observation not a disparagement. 2 people on this forum even said it. And they aren't the only ones who have admitted to it.
The same ego applies to registry sets. You have to slab everything in your registry set. That results in many coins being slabbed that have no financial justification for doing so. Look past the top sets and see how many $20 coins are in$30 slabs.
So what? People can collect what they want. But that doesn't mean ego isn't a factor in how some people collect.
I don't think $20 coins in $30 slabs for non-top sets is due to ego, after all, what is there to brag about if it's not a top set?
I think it's due to a more private desire: completing a set, which a lot of collectors satisfaction out of.
It's just as complete in a Whitman album. It's just not registered as complete in a public forum.
Whitman albums also have worse protection, display and photo / coin management. There are a lot of positives for the registry set aside from ego.
Whitman albums were just an example. There is ZERO need to pay for slabbing economy to protect a coin. Much cheaper options exist.
I don't think cheaper options add as much consistency or sharing benefits. Of course, you could say any kind fo sharing is ego, even sharing Whitman albums
For example, for online sharing, OmniCoin and CoinCollective exist but neither do a great job for set building. What do you think is a good alternative for online set building?
Registry sets are 90% ego in my humble opinion. A very expensive way to store, inventory, and photograph a bunch of $20 or less coins
I don't agree with this. People may have enough discretionary funds that it doesn't matter to them. It can be quite a bit of investment in funds, time and expertise to make TrueView quality photos. And it can be much easier to get them with PCGS than using an outside photographer.
But in a non-ego driven world, how many people would hire a professional to photograph an MS64 Brown 1944 Wheat Cent...unless it were steel?
That's just the point. 30 years ago, people were not individually photographing the coins in their AU/Unc Whitman wheat cent album.
Photos are a sign of the times, the Internet / online sharing times. I'd consider professional-quality photos today (TrueViews or one's own) similar to Capital Plastics holders in the 1960s - 1980s. Same level of ego.
By the way, no one said "ego" had to be bad.
I didn't take you to mean it bad but I got the impression you think a non-top Registry set is different from a Whitman album. To me they are the same. To me, the same "ego" for building a non-top Registry set is akin to building a Whitman album to share, e.g. with your family or at your local coin club.
But, honestly, explain to me why anyone would ever spend $30 per coin on even a BU set of Wheat cents to preserve and photograph each individual coin? Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
Here's another way to ask your question:
Of what use is a set of photographs of Red/brown 1940s wheat cents?
As for the $30 per coin, that just comes down to how much discretionary wealth collectors have.
Oh, I think even a top Registry set is ego-driven. But the expense can be justified for those coins.
I agree. Some collectors like to show off their stuff, no matter how it is housed. But the question raised here was the extreme cost of the slabbing relative to the value of what was in the slab. A $35 Dansco album with BU cents in it makes financial sense and doesn't require as much ego to over-rule your financial sense. The same coins in $1200 worth of slabs requires a lot of ego over-ruling your financial sense.
And, again, I don't really care what you collect or how you collect it. I don't care if you spend $10,000 for $100 worth of coins. That is my "it's a hobby, not an investment" mantra in a nutshell. Do whatever you enjoy and damn the costs.
But someone raised the issue of slabbing inexpensive coins and @MFeld provided some reasons. I added the ego reason as I see it as a major factor in the slab part of the market.
Have you ever been at a coin club and seen someone showing off their new slab with the excitement of a 10-year-old? And you are sitting there thinking "$10 coin in a $35 holder" while trying to be as excited for them as they are for themselves.
I think it's less having an ego than having too much money
For example, I just purchased a slabbed Neil Armstrong piece for 10000% over a raw example which are plentiful enough. I haven't shared it at all. Rather than bragging about it, I wonder if people will think I'm crazy if I share it! Ego or budget?
Go ahead and share your new coin. I'd love to see it. There's no requirement to tell anyone how much you paid for it. In fact, the vast major of coins shown here make no mention of the price paid.
It's on Heritage
High prices are actually par for the course for the Neil Armstrong pieces as even slabbed Boy Scout Troop badges and UN visitor pins have been selling for a lot of money.
I'll probably post it some time. I'm not overly worried about it, I just don't think there will be a lot of interest in it
I have nothing to add. I just want to see how tiny the quote print can go.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series. When I collect by type, I'm simply not interested in learning the grading nuances about the series. I want to enjoy beautiful coins, usually just a handful of each type. This doesn't affect my exonumia collecting since there, I'm often picking up absolute rarities where it can be hard enough to simply see another specimen, much less have an opportunity to buy it.
@keets said:
**This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby**.
so what do you think?? send via PM if you so choose.
It is as good for the hobby or as bad for the hobby as TPGS's. People here still argue that their eyes are all that matter and what the slab says isn't relevant. Yet, an MS67 top pop will often sell for an order of magnitude more than an MS66. Is that good or bad for the market?
What TPGS's and CAC allow to exist is a sight unseen coin market. That has to be good for the hobby. Speaking only for myself, I would NOT buy from major auctions that I could not attend if I were buying only raw coins. The TPGS opinion gives me confidence in the coin and a floor under the price. CAC on top of the slab gives me more confidence in the coin and a floor under the price.
The majority of the coin market is still traded raw. [I'll kind of agree with @Moxie15 here.] But auction houses no longer sell much raw. Why? Because the internet has changed the game.
I think the point he is trying to make, and one that I agree with wholeheartedly, is that a very small percentage of the entire Hobby distorts the overall Hobby.
I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
@keets said: I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
That's pretty insulting.
I have a day job and don't work in the coin business like some. If you knew how much I worked in my day job, I doubt you'd call it laziness.
I think the point he is trying to make, and one that I agree with wholeheartedly, is that a very small percentage of the entire Hobby distorts the overall Hobby.
I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
There's a fine line between being lazy or being smart and relying upon the expertise of someone who is far more knowledgeable than you are. With assistance from the right mentor, many collectors (and dealers, too) can learn more in a matter of minutes than they'd learn on their own over a period of years. I've seen it, first hand.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Zoins, you clearly have enough time to do research on lots of things in the Hobby aside from work, so you aren't lazy, you simply choose to direct your attention elsewhere. I doubt you would buy something you didn't know anything about, but, sadly, many in the Hobby don't think like that. they choose not to learn.
@keets said:
I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences
in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can
just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually
study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a
better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
****Each of us collects in whatever fashion brings the most enjoyment. There is no "right" or "wrong" way.****
@keets said: I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
Another response to this is that I prefer to spend my limited numismatic time on things other people are not doing, rather than on things that professionals have spent more time gaining expertise than I will ever be able to devote. From my personal perspective, I can add more to the hobby by doing something new, rather than doing something professionals are already doing well.
For example, I've been researching the E.A. (Ernest Arrington) Head 5 cent trade token which was mentioned in the December 2005 TAMS Journal with very little info and have been able to compile the following clippings which I haven't seen assembled anywhere before. Prior to this I just had a reference that this was a Depression era business on 1406 Fourth Ave. (no city) but now I know it was also a Roaring 20s business in Seattle. I personally find this a better use of my time to contribute to the hobby. I'm still trying to track down the exact dates his company ran.
I think the point he is trying to make, and one that I agree with wholeheartedly, is that a very small percentage of the entire Hobby distorts the overall Hobby.
I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
Laziness? So is a recreational golfer lazy if he cant break 80 like the pros? Does he need to quit his day job, practice golf 6 hours a day, see a sports psychologist, get fitted for the optimal equipment, etc or and id not he is lazy? Sorry, someone is not lazy if they prefer to use the experience of a pro---JA---- who has tons of knowledge, seen more coins and more problem coins in a year than i will in a lifetime, and generally is the equivalent of a top PGA pro in my analogy. Not laziness----to me it shows humility and intelligence.
Each of us collects in whatever fashion brings the most enjoyment. There is no right" or "wrong" way.
I see education as the key to success in all endeavors. too many times at this site I see members commenting about pictured coins with little knowledge about what they are really doing, not understanding some of the nuances of how coins are struck and why some issues look the way they do. that's fine, we've all been there and I have had to learn like everybody should. the trouble begins when those same members then defend the rise of CAC and its need in the Hobby.
what is probably more in need is personal education and patience, figure out what you want to collect, learn about it and then spend 25 years getting where you want to be. there is really no short-cut to success in any worthwhile endeavor and thinking so is, well, sort of a predecessor to laziness.
Education is the key to a successful collection, not a cabinet full of CAC stickered coins.
Gee, guess I've been wrong all along. I thought a successful collection was one leading to the greatest pleasure and enjoyment. I guess I'll have to start going at it the way somebody else thinks is the only correct approach.
So is a recreational golfer lazy if he cant break 80 like the pros?
to use your analogy, no, but he probably is if he doesn't try to improve, to learn what his strengths are and what weaknesses he needs to improve. of course, if you have trouble in the sand there might be two other options --- stop hitting the ball there or let JA hit it out. then you can feel good about being close to the cup.
@keets said: I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
That's pretty insulting.
I have a day job and don't work in the coin business like some. If you knew how much I worked in my day job, I doubt you'd call it laziness.
I'm a type collector and don't necessarily think this post was insulting. I have learned plenty through the years and actually think CAC does a lousy job on early type. I want the sticker because it increases marketability BUT I have also purchased coins without a sticker when I thought they missed it. That isn't common but it has happened.
Comments
Before hanging my spurs, I was at the very top of the industry. The absolute best coins I ever saw didn't have jelly beans. Only once they go to retail sellers, go on the block, or go to collectors do they get a sticker. I've seen dealers you all know "throw coins at the wall" up to a dozen times seeing "if they stick" and finally get the grade they're fishing for. Not to mention that one of the highest paid people in the industry, does very little aside from selecting coins from the endless stream that are destined for higher grades. A few of you know to whom I refer. Coins is an interesting, and often tricky & messy business.
"He who loves silver will not be satisfied with silver, nor he who loves abundance, with increase. This also is vanity.
When goods increase, they increase who eat them -- so what profit have the owners, except to see them with their eyes?"
"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: fear God and keep His commandments, for this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether good or evil."
"Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father but by Me."
http://www.youtube.com/user/alohabibleprophecy/videos
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Oh, I think even a top Registry set is ego-driven. But the expense can be justified for those coins.
I agree. Some collectors like to show off their stuff, no matter how it is housed. But the question raised here was the extreme cost of the slabbing relative to the value of what was in the slab. A $35 Dansco album with BU cents in it makes financial sense and doesn't require as much ego to over-rule your financial sense. The same coins in $1200 worth of slabs requires a lot of ego over-ruling your financial sense.
And, again, I don't really care what you collect or how you collect it. I don't care if you spend $10,000 for $100 worth of coins. That is my "it's a hobby, not an investment" mantra in a nutshell. Do whatever you enjoy and damn the costs.
But someone raised the issue of slabbing inexpensive coins and @MFeld provided some reasons. I added the ego reason as I see it as a major factor in the slab part of the market.
Have you ever been at a coin club and seen someone showing off their new slab with the excitement of a 10-year-old? And you are sitting there thinking "$10 coin in a $35 holder" while trying to be as excited for them as they are for themselves.
By the way, the need to "demonstratively display" can come under the category of "ego".
I think it's less having an ego than having too much money
For example, I just purchased a slabbed Neil Armstrong piece for 10000% over a raw example which are plentiful enough. I haven't shared it at all. Rather than bragging about it, I wonder if people will think I'm crazy if I share it! Ego or budget?
Sometimes. But, without naming names, we had a member of this forum who referred to himself as cash-poor talking about sending in a single inexpensive coin at a cost of close to $70 to get it slabbed.
But again, I don't care how anyone spends their money.
Do you think that's ego?
Props to Keets for being able to 1) start another CAC thread 2) getting it to over 200 comments without it being shut down by the mods...yet!
legs, hard to believe!!
Wait till they come back from the 4th of July Holiday.
He said he likes to slab them, so yes I think that puts him in the group that considers it an accomplishment to get something "made". [Like we're the gods of plastic or something, LOL.]
Don't forget the 2.7K views
Yeah, but I'm like 2100 of them...
I predicted 1000 when the thread started. Now that jmlanzaf is wound up, he might be good for another 500 on his own...
troll
Ego is selfish.
Ego is Self.
Go ahead and share your new coin. I'd love to see it. There's no requirement to tell anyone how much you paid for it. In fact, the vast major of coins shown here make no mention of the price paid.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
It's on Heritage
High prices are actually par for the course for the Neil Armstrong pieces as even slabbed Boy Scout Troop badges and UN visitor pins have been selling for a lot of money.
I'll probably post it some time. I'm not overly worried about it, I just don't think there will be a lot of interest in it
@Gazes I do not know where the price point exactly is. For the last 2 or 3 years I have not been buying coins as other concerns have been more concerning. The last 'beaned' coin I bought was a 194X PCGS MS65 FB Mercury Dime that cost $18. Not sure how the sticker helped this one.
@jmlanzaf You say I should look around more but then you make my point for me. The large auction houses do not deal with what many would see as the largest part of the market, they are concerned with top end coins and collections. I watched a Sacagawea dollar in a Heritage auction that bid up to 7 gran simply because of the high grade. I do not for a moment think this is the major part of the market, but a small niche
I do not belittle CAC I just do not swim in the sea where it matters much. If you need to have only the best than I can see where it is very important. If you buy the best you can afford and what pleases you and one of the favorite coins in your collection is a raw good 1803 half cent then CAC makes little difference to you.
So, as I tried to say before, outside of this, and other online forums, I have seen a great indifference.
Thank you for the response
I believe that CAC has affected coin prices but I don't accept that it's an easily measured difference. examples can be pointed out but the hidden truth in that should be obvious --- it can't be known how that same coin at that same time would have sold without the CAC sticker. another aspect of the CAC affect has been touched vaguely: if CAC coins are drawing buyers and raising prices, what is the effect on prices of coins which have either been sent to CAC and failed or not been sent??
I would ask why is it seen as good for the Hobby if some areas benefit at the expense of other areas??
Affect: verb (usually)
Effect: noun (usually)
Carry on.
This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby.
corrected, but that's all you took away from that post??
This has been asked many times before on these forums. Others have had similar questions to what you are posing.
Regarding separating some areas from others, that is the explicit purpose of CAC. Reading old threads and Hot Topics from Laura will provide info from those that view it as good for the hobby.
so what do you think?? send via PM if you so choose.
In the past, some dealers have engaged in unsavory practices to abuse TPG grading which exacerbated grading inconsistencies which had to be addressed. For example, the practice of "slamming" on-site graders. CAC is one way to address this which is now even recognized by PCGS with a Set Registry.
So my impression is that one benefit is to address undesirable dealer behavior.
What effect do you think CAC has had on "unsavory practices" of some dealers?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I don't know and I'm not sure that it matters. What matters is if the end result of the undesirable behavior receives an upgrade and a CAC bean. My impression is that is that it won't often enough to make CAC relevant.
THIS.
I'll say it again: Look around more.
Great collections sells a lot of coins for under $50. CAC coins show a price bump. eBay CAC coins sell for more. It's not just Heritage and Stack's and Legends.
Maybe on Craig's list no one cares?
Obviously a 10% price bump on a $15 coin isn't a lot, but it still exists. To argue that CAC isn't a force in the market is willful ignorance.
Are there people who don't know or care about CAC? Yes. But there are also people who think an SGS MS70 is an MS70 coin.
It is not simply people on this forum. To argue that is simply ignorant and every coin venue from coin shows to eBay to major auction houses see the affect.
Or for that matter, professional grading.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I have nothing to add. I just want to see how tiny the quote print can go.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
"Much of the coin market" doesn't care about slabs. I go to a monthly auction where 90% of the coins are raw. What does that prove?
"Much of the coin market" only shops at Littleton.
"Much of the coin market" only buys from the US Mint.
How much is "much"?
Or U.S. coins in general...or pretty much any sub-genre you want to pick.
I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series. When I collect by type, I'm simply not interested in learning the grading nuances about the series. I want to enjoy beautiful coins, usually just a handful of each type. This doesn't affect my exonumia collecting since there, I'm often picking up absolute rarities where it can be hard enough to simply see another specimen, much less have an opportunity to buy it.
It is as good for the hobby or as bad for the hobby as TPGS's. People here still argue that their eyes are all that matter and what the slab says isn't relevant. Yet, an MS67 top pop will often sell for an order of magnitude more than an MS66. Is that good or bad for the market?
What TPGS's and CAC allow to exist is a sight unseen coin market. That has to be good for the hobby. Speaking only for myself, I would NOT buy from major auctions that I could not attend if I were buying only raw coins. The TPGS opinion gives me confidence in the coin and a floor under the price. CAC on top of the slab gives me more confidence in the coin and a floor under the price.
The majority of the coin market is still traded raw. [I'll kind of agree with @Moxie15 here.] But auction houses no longer sell much raw. Why? Because the internet has changed the game.
That's all he wanted to take away from the post.
How much is "much"?
I think the point he is trying to make, and one that I agree with wholeheartedly, is that a very small percentage of the entire Hobby distorts the overall Hobby.
I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
Effect: Verb cause (something) to happen; bring about.
Affect: Verb have an effect on; make a difference to.
So, CAC has affected coin prices by effecting an increase in the price of CAC coins.
You're welcome
That's pretty insulting.
I have a day job and don't work in the coin business like some. If you knew how much I worked in my day job, I doubt you'd call it laziness.
There's a fine line between being lazy or being smart and relying upon the expertise of someone who is far more knowledgeable than you are. With assistance from the right mentor, many collectors (and dealers, too) can learn more in a matter of minutes than they'd learn on their own over a period of years. I've seen it, first hand.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Zoins, you clearly have enough time to do research on lots of things in the Hobby aside from work, so you aren't lazy, you simply choose to direct your attention elsewhere. I doubt you would buy something you didn't know anything about, but, sadly, many in the Hobby don't think like that. they choose not to learn.
@keets said:
I think another reason for CAC that isn't often discussed is the rise of type collecting. Given the differences
in grading between series, type collectors don't have enough coins to become experts in any one series.
and this point highlights the laziness of Americans and Hobbyists --- why take the time to learn when I can
just pay someone else to do it for me?? when I started to collect by "Type" I took it upon myself to actually
study the type of coin I was going to buy with the overriding conclusion that it was going to make me a
better collector. I posted as much here in different threads over the years.
****Each of us collects in whatever fashion brings the most enjoyment. There is no "right" or "wrong" way.****
Coinlearner, Ahrensdad, Nolawyer, RG, coinlieutenant, Yorkshireman, lordmarcovan, Soldi, masscrew, JimTyler, Relaxn, jclovescoins, justindan, doubleeagle07
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't no optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me. . . . . . .
Another response to this is that I prefer to spend my limited numismatic time on things other people are not doing, rather than on things that professionals have spent more time gaining expertise than I will ever be able to devote. From my personal perspective, I can add more to the hobby by doing something new, rather than doing something professionals are already doing well.
For example, I've been researching the E.A. (Ernest Arrington) Head 5 cent trade token which was mentioned in the December 2005 TAMS Journal with very little info and have been able to compile the following clippings which I haven't seen assembled anywhere before. Prior to this I just had a reference that this was a Depression era business on 1406 Fourth Ave. (no city) but now I know it was also a Roaring 20s business in Seattle. I personally find this a better use of my time to contribute to the hobby. I'm still trying to track down the exact dates his company ran.
Laziness? So is a recreational golfer lazy if he cant break 80 like the pros? Does he need to quit his day job, practice golf 6 hours a day, see a sports psychologist, get fitted for the optimal equipment, etc or and id not he is lazy? Sorry, someone is not lazy if they prefer to use the experience of a pro---JA---- who has tons of knowledge, seen more coins and more problem coins in a year than i will in a lifetime, and generally is the equivalent of a top PGA pro in my analogy. Not laziness----to me it shows humility and intelligence.
Each of us collects in whatever fashion brings the most enjoyment. There is no right" or "wrong" way.
I see education as the key to success in all endeavors. too many times at this site I see members commenting about pictured coins with little knowledge about what they are really doing, not understanding some of the nuances of how coins are struck and why some issues look the way they do. that's fine, we've all been there and I have had to learn like everybody should. the trouble begins when those same members then defend the rise of CAC and its need in the Hobby.
what is probably more in need is personal education and patience, figure out what you want to collect, learn about it and then spend 25 years getting where you want to be. there is really no short-cut to success in any worthwhile endeavor and thinking so is, well, sort of a predecessor to laziness.
Education is the key to a successful collection, not a cabinet full of CAC stickered coins.
Gee, guess I've been wrong all along. I thought a successful collection was one leading to the greatest pleasure and enjoyment. I guess I'll have to start going at it the way somebody else thinks is the only correct approach.
Coinlearner, Ahrensdad, Nolawyer, RG, coinlieutenant, Yorkshireman, lordmarcovan, Soldi, masscrew, JimTyler, Relaxn, jclovescoins, justindan, doubleeagle07
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't no optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me. . . . . . .
So is a recreational golfer lazy if he cant break 80 like the pros?
to use your analogy, no, but he probably is if he doesn't try to improve, to learn what his strengths are and what weaknesses he needs to improve. of course, if you have trouble in the sand there might be two other options --- stop hitting the ball there or let JA hit it out. then you can feel good about being close to the cup.
I'm a type collector and don't necessarily think this post was insulting. I have learned plenty through the years and actually think CAC does a lousy job on early type. I want the sticker because it increases marketability BUT I have also purchased coins without a sticker when I thought they missed it. That isn't common but it has happened.