Home U.S. Coin Forum

The second tier grading services could they compete with top tier?

2»

Comments

  • dpooledpoole Posts: 5,940 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @stockdude_ said:
    I think we have enough grading services. Unless they start a computer grading service i think we have what we have

    I agree. It would take a technological innovation plus savvy marketing to make any inroads to the current hierarchy.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,614 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    I would pay more for a raw XF that I assessed as an XF than I would for an ANACS XF based on the holder grade alone.

    Yep- sight seen vs. sight unseen. I have cracked coins out of ANACS 64/65 holders that graded 66/67 at PCGS/NGC. You can't always go by the labels- you have to look at the coins if you want to be sure.

    Yes, this is very true. There are some really great coins in ANACS holders. But you just can't trust the holder alone which is why they are 2nd tier. Especially if you are talking about ANACS holders from different time periods. They were tight then loose then tight again.

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,013 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @KSorbo said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @KSorbo said:
    ICG and ANACS already occupy a niche due to their being cheaper. They are far from being basement slabber and I disagree with the assertion that their coins should be viewed as raw. Perhaps they are getting the best return on capital by staying where they are. For some people it’s enough to know that their $100 coin has been graded by a competent person and not made in China.

    You might want to emphasize authentication rather than grading. If you can't trust the market accuracy of the grade, it is of very limited utility. That is why in the sight unseen market, they trade at a significant discount to NGC and PCGS.

    Wouldn’t that depend on the situation? I agree that if a coin is in an ANACS slab graded MS66, and a 66 trades at twice the price of a 65, then the market would not value the coin as a 66. I’m thinking more that if someone wants an XF seated half for their type set, or an MS62 Carson City Morgan, they are a lot better off buying one off EBay in an ANACS slab than raw. Not only does it give assurance of authenticity, but it also reduces the risk of getting stuck with a coin with problems not captured in a photo. At least someone other than the seller who knows what they are doing has looked at it.

    Except that again assumes that the XF isn't a VF30 at PCGS or, worse, that the XF isn't an XF details at PCGS. The whole reason that ANACS and ICG trade at a discount is that the market doesn't trust their grades. Personally, I would not trust an ICG XF to be a true no problem XF.

    The only thing that I, as a part-time dealer, would use ANACS for is determination of authenticity. I would pay more for a raw XF that I assessed as an XF than I would for an ANACS XF based on the holder grade alone.

    It all depends on the coin, the series and the basis for the grades. Mike Fahey is a senior numismatist at Anacs, I would trust his judgment over raw "graded" coins every day of the week. Also ICG has numismatists with many decades of experience, wisdom, grading knowledge, Skip Fazzari and Randy Campbell have made huge contributions to the hobby and grade accurately in many cases. Bias and bigotry against seasoned numismatists shouldn't have a place in this hobby. Buying the coin should be the objective, and understanding the basis for the grades. You would think in the digital age you could pay a grading service a small fee for an overview and discussion of the coin as David Hall used to do.

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 11,920 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @logger7 said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @KSorbo said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @KSorbo said:
    ICG and ANACS already occupy a niche due to their being cheaper. They are far from being basement slabber and I disagree with the assertion that their coins should be viewed as raw. Perhaps they are getting the best return on capital by staying where they are. For some people it’s enough to know that their $100 coin has been graded by a competent person and not made in China.

    You might want to emphasize authentication rather than grading. If you can't trust the market accuracy of the grade, it is of very limited utility. That is why in the sight unseen market, they trade at a significant discount to NGC and PCGS.

    Wouldn’t that depend on the situation? I agree that if a coin is in an ANACS slab graded MS66, and a 66 trades at twice the price of a 65, then the market would not value the coin as a 66. I’m thinking more that if someone wants an XF seated half for their type set, or an MS62 Carson City Morgan, they are a lot better off buying one off EBay in an ANACS slab than raw. Not only does it give assurance of authenticity, but it also reduces the risk of getting stuck with a coin with problems not captured in a photo. At least someone other than the seller who knows what they are doing has looked at it.

    Except that again assumes that the XF isn't a VF30 at PCGS or, worse, that the XF isn't an XF details at PCGS. The whole reason that ANACS and ICG trade at a discount is that the market doesn't trust their grades. Personally, I would not trust an ICG XF to be a true no problem XF.

    The only thing that I, as a part-time dealer, would use ANACS for is determination of authenticity. I would pay more for a raw XF that I assessed as an XF than I would for an ANACS XF based on the holder grade alone.

    It all depends on the coin, the series and the basis for the grades. Mike Fahey is a senior numismatist at Anacs, I would trust his judgment over raw "graded" coins every day of the week. Also ICG has numismatists with many decades of experience, wisdom, grading knowledge, Skip Fazzari and Randy Campbell have made huge contributions to the hobby and grade accurately in many cases. Bias and bigotry against seasoned numismatists shouldn't have a place in this hobby. Buying the coin should be the objective, and understanding the basis for the grades. You would think in the digital age you could pay a grading service a small fee for an overview and discussion of the coin as David Hall used to do.

    Are you speaking of the former “presidential review”? If so, I think that often took weeks, if not months. Something similar would likely be too expensive and/or too slow for the majority of potential submitters.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • Cougar1978Cougar1978 Posts: 7,541 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 14, 2021 6:19PM

    I would say unlikely - All dealer submitters I know of submit to top 2. If curious Simply do an eBay search by TPG: PCGS, NGC /PMG, Anacs, ICG to gauge number of items by TPG above for site for coins and currency (TPG recognized by eBay).

    However I do have some ANACS & ICG coins (all material under $100 cost) and price them like any other. I price the coin where I feel it fits in the assigned grade range on the holder. This could be based on cost plus, CW Trends, TPG, or CPG. Many deals I purchase have a combo of all 4 TPG.

    I sometimes wonder if in future of possibility of merger sort of like XOM is a merger of Exxon and Mobil.

    I am a PCGS submitter (both coins and currency). For coins, the PCGS inventory (registry) app and CF makes things easy.

    So Cali Area - Coins & Currency
  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @logger7 said:
    It all depends on the coin, the series and the basis for the grades. Mike Fahey is a senior numismatist at Anacs, I would trust his judgment over raw "graded" coins every day of the week. Also ICG has numismatists with many decades of experience, wisdom, grading knowledge, Skip Fazzari and Randy Campbell have made huge contributions to the hobby and grade accurately in many cases.

    Part of the problem here is how perception influences reality. The perception is that PCGS/NGC grades more accurately than ANACS/ICG and, to a lesser extent, that PCGS is grades more accurately than NGC. This generally elevates the value of one over the other in the eyes of potential buyers. As a result, coins in holders of the less favored services that are considered to be the equal of ones in holders of the more favored services get cracked out and sent to the more favored services. Lather, rinse, repeat. Eventually, a large number of "accurately graded" coins move from less favored holders to more favored ones, leaving the lower end coins in the less favored holders. This reinforces in the minds of buyers that the more favored holders hold better coins than less favored holders.

    How can ANACS/ICG become more competitive? I don't know.

  • CatbertCatbert Posts: 6,549 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG you are echoing my thoughts shared earlier in this thread. 👍

    "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,614 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @logger7 said:
    It all depends on the coin, the series and the basis for the grades. Mike Fahey is a senior numismatist at Anacs, I would trust his judgment over raw "graded" coins every day of the week. Also ICG has numismatists with many decades of experience, wisdom, grading knowledge, Skip Fazzari and Randy Campbell have made huge contributions to the hobby and grade accurately in many cases.

    Part of the problem here is how perception influences reality. The perception is that PCGS/NGC grades more accurately than ANACS/ICG and, to a lesser extent, that PCGS is grades more accurately than NGC. This generally elevates the value of one over the other in the eyes of potential buyers. As a result, coins in holders of the less favored services that are considered to be the equal of ones in holders of the more favored services get cracked out and sent to the more favored services. Lather, rinse, repeat. Eventually, a large number of "accurately graded" coins move from less favored holders to more favored ones, leaving the lower end coins in the less favored holders. This reinforces in the minds of buyers that the more favored holders hold better coins than less favored holders.

    How can ANACS/ICG become more competitive? I don't know.

    It's not just perception. There are a lot of loosely graded ANACS and ICG coins from various periods in their past. They drag down everything.

    Now, JA could fix it if CAC would sticker ANACS and ICG, but that's a thread killer. LOL.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:
    It's not just perception.

    Yep. That's why I said it was part of the problem. ;)

    @jmlanzaf said:
    Now, JA could fix it if CAC would sticker ANACS and ICG...

    Does a PCGS & NGC coin, each with the same grade and a sticker, sell for the same amount of money? If not, how would stickers help ANACS and ICG? Not being snarky here- I can see how it might boost the value of some ANACS/ICG coins but- is that fixing things or rearranging deck chairs?

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,614 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @logger7 said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @KSorbo said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @KSorbo said:
    ICG and ANACS already occupy a niche due to their being cheaper. They are far from being basement slabber and I disagree with the assertion that their coins should be viewed as raw. Perhaps they are getting the best return on capital by staying where they are. For some people it’s enough to know that their $100 coin has been graded by a competent person and not made in China.

    You might want to emphasize authentication rather than grading. If you can't trust the market accuracy of the grade, it is of very limited utility. That is why in the sight unseen market, they trade at a significant discount to NGC and PCGS.

    Wouldn’t that depend on the situation? I agree that if a coin is in an ANACS slab graded MS66, and a 66 trades at twice the price of a 65, then the market would not value the coin as a 66. I’m thinking more that if someone wants an XF seated half for their type set, or an MS62 Carson City Morgan, they are a lot better off buying one off EBay in an ANACS slab than raw. Not only does it give assurance of authenticity, but it also reduces the risk of getting stuck with a coin with problems not captured in a photo. At least someone other than the seller who knows what they are doing has looked at it.

    Except that again assumes that the XF isn't a VF30 at PCGS or, worse, that the XF isn't an XF details at PCGS. The whole reason that ANACS and ICG trade at a discount is that the market doesn't trust their grades. Personally, I would not trust an ICG XF to be a true no problem XF.

    The only thing that I, as a part-time dealer, would use ANACS for is determination of authenticity. I would pay more for a raw XF that I assessed as an XF than I would for an ANACS XF based on the holder grade alone.

    It all depends on the coin, the series and the basis for the grades. Mike Fahey is a senior numismatist at Anacs, I would trust his judgment over raw "graded" coins every day of the week. Also ICG has numismatists with many decades of experience, wisdom, grading knowledge, Skip Fazzari and Randy Campbell have made huge contributions to the hobby and grade accurately in many cases. Bias and bigotry against seasoned numismatists shouldn't have a place in this hobby. Buying the coin should be the objective, and understanding the basis for the grades. You would think in the digital age you could pay a grading service a small fee for an overview and discussion of the coin as David Hall used to do.

    The problem is the inconsistency over time. During some time periods, ANACS and ICG were quite strict. At t> @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    It's not just perception.

    Yep. That's why I said it was part of the problem. ;)

    @jmlanzaf said:
    Now, JA could fix it if CAC would sticker ANACS and ICG...

    Does a PCGS & NGC coin, each with the same grade and a sticker, sell for the same amount of money? If not, how would stickers help ANACS and ICG? Not being snarky here- I can see how it might boost the value of some ANACS/ICG coins but- is that fixing things or rearranging deck chairs?

    I don't think it completely fixes it, but it closes the gap. A sight-unseen coin now trades at a huge discount if it is ICG or ANACS, much larger than the NGC/PCGS gap.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:
    I don't think it completely fixes it, but it closes the gap.

    That sounds about right.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,614 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    I don't think it completely fixes it, but it closes the gap.

    That sounds about right.

    Then again, it's not really JA's responsibility to clean up ANACS and ICG's mess.

  • MasonGMasonG Posts: 6,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I wasn't thinking you meant so. It's more like a thought experiment.

  • ShaunBC5ShaunBC5 Posts: 1,617 ✭✭✭✭✭

    When we talk about “sight unseen” coins trading at a discount, are we talking about truly unseen coins, or are internet (pics only, not in-hand) included in that as well. I’m just curious, mostly because I didn’t think anyone bought sight unseen anymore. Thanks.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,614 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ShaunBC5 said:
    When we talk about “sight unseen” coins trading at a discount, are we talking about truly unseen coins, or are internet (pics only, not in-hand) included in that as well. I’m just curious, mostly because I didn’t think anyone bought sight unseen anymore. Thanks.

    Sight unseen is sight unseen. Grey sheet (blues) are soft unseen prices. A lot of CAC buys are sight unseen as well, you can do it both ways.

    When sight seen the slab will tend to trade at a discount, just less severe. What do you think a top pop in an ICG slab will trade at relative to that same grade, even the same coin, in a PCGS holder.

    The bluesheet used to have a table of average discount for the other services.

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 11,920 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 15, 2021 5:10AM

    @ShaunBC5 said:
    When we talk about “sight unseen” coins trading at a discount, are we talking about truly unseen coins, or are internet (pics only, not in-hand) included in that as well. I’m just curious, mostly because I didn’t think anyone bought sight unseen anymore. Thanks.

    To me, “sight-unseen” means without the coin in hand. Sometimes images can provide a very good approximation of what a coin looks like, but many times, they fail to do so.

    Depending upon the coin, the difference in quality (and thus value) can be substantial. Hence the wide gap between sight-seen and sight-unseen bids/offers in many instances.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I unapologetically drink the PCGS Koolaide, but at the heart of the argument is that many of the issues being talked about have been settled by PCGS and NGC. those would seem to be size/shape of the holder, information contained on the insert, range of items encapsulated, accessibility of a census/pricing, anti-counterfeit measures, high quality photographs and a competitive and reasonable price.

    someone on page one mentioned "re-inventing the wheel" which is a lot of what holder design entails. I would have to think that PCGS/NGC do market studies and research to see how their capsules and other aspects of the service is perceived. small changes are implemented, nothing really big. aside from larger, similarly looking capsules for larger items, the PCGS/NGC holder has remained unchanged for well over two decades now, they both seem to have found what the overall Hobby seems is Right.

    there have been threads in the past which ask for members to give opinions on aspects of the various holders that the like. about the only one that seems constantly in agreement is the SEGS/ANACS ability to read an insert from above when stored in a box. apparently SEGS has some sort of patent on that feature, so anything else would be change for the sake of change, the holder design seems to have been settled. those cutesy GENI holders are pretty radical and the fact that all we see in them is foreign says a lot to me. it also strikes me as funny that no information is viewable. isn't that what everyone already doesn't like??

    given the current state of affairs at PCGS which seem tied to the COVID-19 pandemic, the one aspect of TPG's that we all would like to see improved on is turnaround time. we seem to like the holder, we tend to agree with the services provided, we like the range of material graded and we don't mind the cost. what we do mind is time!!

    quite a while ago the time at PCGS was longer than it is now while NGC had coins back in about half the time. submitters, mainly dealers and collectors who were re-selling, opted for NGC even though they knew they'd be selling for a lower price than a PCGS slabbed coin. to their way of thinking, the cash flow had to continue as fast as possible. I really believe a new TPG would have to figure out how to keep all the features we like with a PCGS and NGC holder while simultaneously gaining our confidence in their ability to accurately grade, then do it at a lower price and shorter time.

    I will not hold my breath and I have no worries that PCGS and/or NGC will be vanishing during my lifetime. now, pass me the Koolaide, Cherry please. B)

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,013 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MasonG said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    It's not just perception.

    Yep. That's why I said it was part of the problem. ;)

    @jmlanzaf said:
    Now, JA could fix it if CAC would sticker ANACS and ICG...

    Does a PCGS & NGC coin, each with the same grade and a sticker, sell for the same amount of money? If not, how would stickers help ANACS and ICG? Not being snarky here- I can see how it might boost the value of some ANACS/ICG coins but- is that fixing things or rearranging deck chairs?

    I contacted cac on that issue, of the second tier coins being accepted for submission and got no response several times. Since those on their "collector" submission list don't pay for coins that are rejected for the sticker, they would not want to be flooded with Anacs and Icg coins with some collectors wanting to know why they didn't pass unless the submitter had to pay for every submission. Rejected on grounds of a problem, of the coin be overgraded, etc. indicated on a sticky would be educational as with the top tier. If they gold stickered a second tier coin would that present a problem?

    Greysheet is based on correct ANA grading and grading standards.

    What I see with the second tier graded coins is that they will straight grade coins that "they" consider market acceptable. But good luck getting seasoned collectors to agree and pay the money grades especially on Seated, Bust and similar classic material.

    I have some second tier coins that would cross but it is a lot of work and expensive and in these days of big delays with shipping and everything else I just do not want to do it. I paid $450 for a better date Morgan that was graded MS64 by a second tier service that I have shown to dealers who see it has a high end no problem MS64, one of the guys scored a perfect score in the PCGS grading competition. He generally agrees with the second tier graded coins, but obviously some are overgraded, no question. High end images can help when you go to sell. As far as major raw coin sellers on ebay or companies like Centsles selling second tier graded coins on ebay, I would be very reluctant to bid on money grades especially gold coins where the spreads are just too great and risks are commensurately great. Unless a seller of those coins is willing to do a thorough and honest overview of why it is graded at that level and what are the merits and defects then smart money has to say no. Problem coins are problem coins no matter which of the service holders it is in. There have been well over 30 years of the grading phenomenon with many tens of millions of coins certified. A percentage have "issues", some issues could be remedied through conservation/restoration, some can't. Honest assessments are vital for the sake of consumer rights.

  • Cougar1978Cougar1978 Posts: 7,541 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 15, 2021 3:48PM

    It depends on how you define competing. Most market share - no. The 2 majors have most by far.

    The TPG accepted by eBay for Coins and Currency are ANACS, ICG, PCGS, NGC / PMG.

    Stats per eBay listings today (thousands) Anacs 27, ICG 18, PCGS 190, NGC 200, PMG 54 (NGC & PMG 254).

    So Cali Area - Coins & Currency
  • DelawareDoonsDelawareDoons Posts: 3,208 ✭✭✭✭✭

    To answer the crux of OP's points...

    You don't need THAT much capital. You don't need to buy back mistakes.

    They just need to scrap the present holders, come up with something completely new, lock down the grading standards in-line with the top-tier TPG's, and keep 'em there. It'll take a few years to pay off and volume will probably drop during that timeframe because of the expectation of looser grades disappearing, but if they are committed to it, they could easily see the new holders get lifted up to the upper tier of the market within 2-3 years as long as the standards are maintained.

    Professional Numismatist. "It's like God, Family, Country, except Sticker, Plastic, Coin."

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,013 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My solution on coins you may be interested in not in your wanted holder (best IMO PCGS/cac) ask some questions, any problems?, is there anything missing in the pictures?, how is the luster?, is the coin really white as it looks, toned, colors? How is your return policy if I'm not happy? Do you think the coin will cross to PCGS, etc.? Answers should tell you if it is worth taking the chance. As my dear mother used to say, "communication is the world's greatest problem".

  • koynekwestkoynekwest Posts: 10,048 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think SEGS has, by far, the best slab. Unfortunately, their reputation lags far behind their slab.

  • santinidollarsantinidollar Posts: 1,055 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If I had to choose, I’d try to boost ANACS or IGC over starting a new service.

  • amwldcoinamwldcoin Posts: 11,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It will be interesting to see what happens with SEGS. It has a new owner now.

    @koynekwest said:
    I think SEGS has, by far, the best slab. Unfortunately, their reputation lags far behind their slab.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,614 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @santinidollar said:
    If I had to choose, I’d try to boost ANACS or IGC over starting a new service.

    IDK, isn't that like calling a ship the Exxon Valdez II? You get a lot of history with those two names, both good and bad.

    If I were going to try and compete, I'd call it Albanese Grading and Authentication and hired Bob Albanese as my partner or Mary Albanese or Jesus Albanese...

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 33,811 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @logger7 said:
    My solution on coins you may be interested in not in your wanted holder (best IMO PCGS/cac) ask some questions, any problems?, is there anything missing in the pictures?, how is the luster?, is the coin really white as it looks, toned, colors? How is your return policy if I'm not happy? Do you think the coin will cross to PCGS, etc.? Answers should tell you if it is worth taking the chance. As my dear mother used to say, "communication is the world's greatest problem".

    Many of those questions are worth asking, even when the coin is in your wanted holder.

  • ZoinsZoins Posts: 33,811 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I think it could be interesting to have a grading service offer great photos and NuTilt.

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,013 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 16, 2021 4:39PM

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @santinidollar said:
    If I had to choose, I’d try to boost ANACS or IGC over starting a new service.

    IDK, isn't that like calling a ship the Exxon Valdez II? You get a lot of history with those two names, both good and bad.

    If I were going to try and compete, I'd call it Albanese Grading and Authentication and hired Bob Albanese as my partner or Mary Albanese or Jesus Albanese...

    Both Anacs and ICG have done a lot of accurate grading; so calling them "The Titanic" the "Exxon Valdez", etc. is just an ugly and unwarranted slam. They both keep problem coins out of their straight holders, and sure they have had their errors as has the top tier services. In fact I've gotten more problems noted on some coins than NGC noted. Specific patterns of bad grading could be addressed with the grading service, the ANA, PNG or the state consumer affairs department.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,614 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 16, 2021 4:44PM

    @logger7 said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @santinidollar said:
    If I had to choose, I’d try to boost ANACS or IGC over starting a new service.

    IDK, isn't that like calling a ship the Exxon Valdez II? You get a lot of history with those two names, both good and bad.

    If I were going to try and compete, I'd call it Albanese Grading and Authentication and hired Bob Albanese as my partner or Mary Albanese or Jesus Albanese...

    Both Anacs and ICG have done a lot of accurate grading; so calling them "The Titanic" the "Exxon Valdez", etc. is just an ugly and unwarranted slam. They both keep problem coins out of their straight holders, and sure they have had their errors as has the top tier services. In fact I've gotten more problems noted on some coins than NGC noted. Specific patterns of bad grading could be addressed with the grading service, the ANA, PNG or the state consumer affairs department.

    My point is not that they are a complete disaster but that you inherit the negative reputation. It is that negative reputation that results in the giant discount for ANACS and ICG slabs. What is the point of struggling to redeem a bad reputation when it is easier to simply start with a clean slate? Sure, you gain some name recognition with ANACS and ICG that you'd have to develop with a new name, but that name recognition has a somewhat negative connotation in the market place.

    I mean, if you wanted to start a new high end boutique, you wouldn't call it K-Mart.

    In my ever humble opinion...

  • koynekwestkoynekwest Posts: 10,048 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @amwldcoin said:
    It will be interesting to see what happens with SEGS. It has a new owner now.

    @koynekwest said:
    I think SEGS has, by far, the best slab. Unfortunately, their reputation lags far behind their slab.

    Larry Briggs no longer owns it? Who owns it now?

  • amwldcoinamwldcoin Posts: 11,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don't know if I'm at liberty to say.

    @koynekwest said:

    @amwldcoin said:
    It will be interesting to see what happens with SEGS. It has a new owner now.

    @koynekwest said:
    I think SEGS has, by far, the best slab. Unfortunately, their reputation lags far behind their slab.

    Larry Briggs no longer owns it? Who owns it now?

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file