@pmh1nic said:
Pay up for quality??? Tell me what increase in quality there is between an MS-65 and MS-66 coin or better yet a 68 and 69. I don't begrudge anyone for how they spend there money but that doesn't mean the question isn't a valid question. You should be able to articulate the reasons for the 5x premium.
Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that you don’t understand why some people choose to pay up for an MS66 that cost 5x the cost of a “similar” looking MS65 (or MS69 instead of an MS68). While the TPG’s and CAC do make occasional errors, their experts in grading can indeed quantify those differences in quality. I find it sad that you can’t just be genuinely happy for those that choose to pay up for those differences, instead of being judgmental by thinking that the price differentials for these small quality increases is crazy or insane.
My above post sorrt of addresses this but I'll respond.
This has nothing to do with happiness. No one owes me an explanation for why they buy what they buy. I read post and respond because I have an opinion and conveying my opinion in writing forces me to consider and reconsider why I have a certain opinion.
When it comes to coin grading there are certain criteria involved in assigning a particular grade. Asking someone to articulate what the differences are between a 65 and 66 or 66 and 67 isn't being judgemental. You would hope the person paying a 5x premium for those differences can explain what those differences are that justified in their mind paying the premium. We don't have to agree on whether paying the premium is justified (their money, their choice) but we should be able to agree on what those differences are.
@pmh1nic You seemed obsessed with people buying top graded coins at higher prices. You ask alot of questions. Please answer these questions:
1) why do you care how others spend their money?
2) do you care as much when someone pays more for ticket to an event than face value?
3) is it not permissible if a collector wants to have the very best coin even if that coin is only slightly better? Do you believe in a free market?
4) is it possible to pay 5x premium as u say for the top pop and still make a profit but lose money if you had pay for the next grade down?
5)does it bother you when someone else pays for a Mercedes when they could by a cheaper car that gets you to the same place?
6) why is it that it bothers you so much what others do with their money?
7) what if someone told you paying over face value for any coin did not make sense? Would you listen to them? Would it offend you if they kept insisting it?
8) do you consider yourself an equal grader compared to JA?
Just a few questions. Please answer I can determine the merit of your position. Thanks
Obsessed? Not at all. We’re simply having a discussion about valuations.
You interpret my asking questions as caring (emotional). I don’t “care” on way or another but I’d like to understand the reasoning for why people are willing to pay high premiums for admittedly minor differences.
Again you use the word care as if I’m emotionally involved in the decision. Are they 50 feet from the stage or 500 feet. I might have an opinion about the value of the experience the are buying. I’d be interested in the reasoning.
This was addressed in a number of prior responses. Your money to be spent as you see fit.
We weren’t taking the issue of selling but buying. But that does one reason the premiums have gotten so high, together nd CAC sticker. That was part of my earlier comments.
5 - 7 Bother, bother and offend. All are dealing with an emotional response. You seem to be bothered and offended that I ask about the decision making process when someone pays a high premium for a coin. Why are you so emotionally invested in these questions?
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
Pay up for quality??? Tell me what increase in quality there is between an MS-65 and MS-66 coin or better yet a 68 and 69. I don't begrudge anyone for how they spend there money but that doesn't mean the question isn't a valid question. You should be able to articulate the reasons for the 5x premium.
Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that you don’t understand why some people choose to pay up for an MS66 that cost 5x the cost of a “similar” looking MS65 (or MS69 instead of an MS68). While the TPG’s and CAC do make occasional errors, their experts in grading can indeed quantify those differences in quality. I find it sad that you can’t just be genuinely happy for those that choose to pay up for those differences, instead of being judgmental by thinking that the price differentials for these small quality increases is crazy or insane.
My above post sorrt of addresses this but I'll respond.
This has nothing to do with happiness. No one owes me an explanation for why they buy what they buy. I read post and respond because I have an opinion and conveying my opinion in writing forces me to consider and reconsider why I have a certain opinion.
When it comes to coin grading there are certain criteria involved in assigning a particular grade. Asking someone to articulate what the differences are between a 65 and 66 or 66 and 67 isn't being judgemental. You would hope the person paying a 5x premium for those differences can explain what those differences are that justified in their mind paying the premium. We don't have to agree on whether paying the premium is justified (their money, their choice) but we should be able to agree on what those differences are.
@pmh1nic You seemed obsessed with people buying top graded coins at higher prices. You ask alot of questions. Please answer these questions:
1) why do you care how others spend their money?
2) do you care as much when someone pays more for ticket to an event than face value?
3) is it not permissible if a collector wants to have the very best coin even if that coin is only slightly better? Do you believe in a free market?
4) is it possible to pay 5x premium as u say for the top pop and still make a profit but lose money if you had pay for the next grade down?
5)does it bother you when someone else pays for a Mercedes when they could by a cheaper car that gets you to the same place?
6) why is it that it bothers you so much what others do with their money?
7) what if someone told you paying over face value for any coin did not make sense? Would you listen to them? Would it offend you if they kept insisting it?
8) do you consider yourself an equal grader compared to JA?
Just a few questions. Please answer I can determine the merit of your position. Thanks
Obsessed? Not at all. We’re simply having a discussion about valuations.
You interpret my asking questions as caring (emotional). I don’t “care” on way or another but I’d like to understand the reasoning for why people are willing to pay high premiums for admittedly minor differences.
Again you use the word care as if I’m emotionally involved in the decision. Are they 50 feet from the stage or 500 feet. I might have an opinion about the value of the experience the are buying. I’d be interested in the reasoning.
This was addressed in a number of prior responses. Your money to be spent as you see fit.
We weren’t taking the issue of selling but buying. But that does one reason the premiums have gotten so high, together nd CAC sticker. That was part of my earlier comments.
5 - 7 Bother, bother and offend. All are dealing with an emotional response. You seem to be bothered and offended that I ask about the decision making process when someone pays a high premium for a coin. Why are you so emotionally invested in these questions?
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
You say "I would like to understand the reasoning" for people paying high premiums. People have explained it to you over and over but you keep arguing it. If you want to just know the rationale than you know it. However you seem to not be able to accept people may have a different opinion than you.
If you say you can learn by viewing 100 examples of a type---sure. If you think you're even in the same league as JA from looking at 100 examplea-well I disagree.
In fact, you could actually ask the question the other way around: why is the 1 grade lower coin only worth 20% of the highest graded one? That MUST be a buying opportunity.
And that's my concern! Ignore the debate about a MS69 versus a MS70. Are potential collectors thinking a coin one grade lower is not a meaningful coin? Let's talk about a MS 62 versus a MS 63 or MS 64. CAC of course.
Personally, I think the US market is too big and too mature to be inefficiently priced.
@pmh1nic said:
Grading isn't rocket science. I don't think the issue is really grading but name recognition. I think just about anyone could learn to grade very accurately after getting familiar with the standards for each grade, viewing 100 examples of a particular coin in various stages of preservation and given accurate feedback. I don't think you really learn that much more after viewing the next 100 or 1000 coins but I'd be interest in hearing what others think.
Quite a few very reputable and highly qualified dealers have had coins they think would CAC but don't!
That just further demonstrates the ridiculous nature of so called grading "standards" and the insanity in paying 5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.
I don’t know of any coins that are bought for “5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.” No need to exaggerate to try to make your point.
Are you sure he hasn't just revealed the fallacy that underlies his opinion?
1876 Liberty $20 MS-64 $45K, MS-65 $225K
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
“I don’t like CAC because one man should not have that much influence over the entire U.S. coin market. He’s an expert, but he is not perfect. “
Bill it’s the “market” that apparently says he indeed has that much influence on the entire coin market .
Not the man himself . All he did was create a company.
This shows that it’s over. For thinking people the U.S. coin market is dead. You say you hide behind “the market.” No you hide behind CAC and the man who runs runs it.
Well this is a US coin forum so if you think it is dead.....Odd how you feel the US coin market is dead as we read about new collectors in all aspects of the hobby and seeing record prices. Seems like the better US coins do, the less you seem to enjoy it. Odd.
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
I’ll challenge that. If you were going to view 100 examples of a particular type, have you done the math and calculated how many of each specific grade that would be? I have and the number could literally be counted on one hand. Among the very few examples of each that you’d be viewing, you wouldn’t have the perspective to know which were low end, mid-range, high end, over-graded or under-graded. And of course, that doesn’t even inclide problem (details-grade) coins - cleaning, altered surfaces, repairs, tooling, artificial toning/color, added mint-marks, counterfeits, altered dates, whizzing, rim filing and so on.
But wait, there’s more, much more. What about different dates and mints in each series? They’re not all produced the same way. There are differences in strike, luster, texture and color, that need to be learned. I could go on and on, but if you don’t already realize how your figure of 100 examples is so ludicrously insufficient, I don’t think you ever will...unless you were to try it yourself.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
I’ll challenge that. If you were going to view 100 examples of a particular type, have you done the math and calculated how many of each specific grade that would be? I have and the number could literally be counted on one hand. Among the very few examples of each that you’d be viewing, you wouldn’t have the perspective to know which were low end, mid-range, high end, over-graded or under-graded. And of course, that doesn’t even inclide problem (details-grade) coins - cleaning, altered surfaces, repairs, tooling, artificial toning/color, added mint-marks, counterfeits, altered dates, whizzing, rim filing and so on.
But wait, there’s more, much more. What about different dates and mints in each series? They’re not all produced the same way. There are differences in strike, luster, texture and color, that need to be learned. I could go on and on, but if you don’t already realize how your figure of 100 examples is so ludicrously insufficient, I don’t think you ever will...unless you were to try it yourself.
Mark,
You might recall an earlier discussion over "original luster" where the same forumite argued that a simple reading of the ANACS grading guide allowed him to conclude that PCGS was misapplying the grading standards. So, 100 coins is 100 more than it took to question PCGS standards.
I've looked at thousands of Buffalo nickels, my favorite US series. I still have a lot to learn.
You might also add proof vs specimen vs business strike as something you won't learn in a 100 coin viewing sample.
@BillJones said:
The choir continues to sing and circle the wagons. You win. I am mostly done with U.S. coins.
tell me if my assumption is wrong - a lot of your collection hasn't been to CAC - since you have a good eye, a lot of your collection will probably get beaned at some point in the future
“I don’t like CAC because one man should not have that much influence over the entire U.S. coin market. He’s an expert, but he is not perfect. “
Bill it’s the “market” that apparently says he indeed has that much influence on the entire coin market .
Not the man himself . All he did was create a company.
This shows that it’s over. For thinking people the U.S. coin market is dead. You say you hide behind “the market.” No you hide behind CAC and the man who runs runs it.
Well this is a US coin forum so if you think it is dead.....Odd how you feel the US coin market is dead as we read about new collectors in all aspects of the hobby and seeing record prices. Seems like the better US coins do, the less you seem to enjoy it. Odd.
He didn't say it was dead. He said it was dead for "thinking people".
@pmh1nic said:
Pay up for quality??? Tell me what increase in quality there is between an MS-65 and MS-66 coin or better yet a 68 and 69. I don't begrudge anyone for how they spend there money but that doesn't mean the question isn't a valid question. You should be able to articulate the reasons for the 5x premium.
Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that you don’t understand why some people choose to pay up for an MS66 that cost 5x the cost of a “similar” looking MS65 (or MS69 instead of an MS68). While the TPG’s and CAC do make occasional errors, their experts in grading can indeed quantify those differences in quality. I find it sad that you can’t just be genuinely happy for those that choose to pay up for those differences, instead of being judgmental by thinking that the price differentials for these small quality increases is crazy or insane.
My above post sorrt of addresses this but I'll respond.
This has nothing to do with happiness. No one owes me an explanation for why they buy what they buy. I read post and respond because I have an opinion and conveying my opinion in writing forces me to consider and reconsider why I have a certain opinion.
When it comes to coin grading there are certain criteria involved in assigning a particular grade. Asking someone to articulate what the differences are between a 65 and 66 or 66 and 67 isn't being judgemental. You would hope the person paying a 5x premium for those differences can explain what those differences are that justified in their mind paying the premium. We don't have to agree on whether paying the premium is justified (their money, their choice) but we should be able to agree on what those differences are.
@pmh1nic You seemed obsessed with people buying top graded coins at higher prices. You ask alot of questions. Please answer these questions:
1) why do you care how others spend their money?
2) do you care as much when someone pays more for ticket to an event than face value?
3) is it not permissible if a collector wants to have the very best coin even if that coin is only slightly better? Do you believe in a free market?
4) is it possible to pay 5x premium as u say for the top pop and still make a profit but lose money if you had pay for the next grade down?
5)does it bother you when someone else pays for a Mercedes when they could by a cheaper car that gets you to the same place?
6) why is it that it bothers you so much what others do with their money?
7) what if someone told you paying over face value for any coin did not make sense? Would you listen to them? Would it offend you if they kept insisting it?
8) do you consider yourself an equal grader compared to JA?
Just a few questions. Please answer I can determine the merit of your position. Thanks
Obsessed? Not at all. We’re simply having a discussion about valuations.
You interpret my asking questions as caring (emotional). I don’t “care” on way or another but I’d like to understand the reasoning for why people are willing to pay high premiums for admittedly minor differences.
Again you use the word care as if I’m emotionally involved in the decision. Are they 50 feet from the stage or 500 feet. I might have an opinion about the value of the experience the are buying. I’d be interested in the reasoning.
This was addressed in a number of prior responses. Your money to be spent as you see fit.
We weren’t taking the issue of selling but buying. But that does one reason the premiums have gotten so high, together nd CAC sticker. That was part of my earlier comments.
5 - 7 Bother, bother and offend. All are dealing with an emotional response. You seem to be bothered and offended that I ask about the decision making process when someone pays a high premium for a coin. Why are you so emotionally invested in these questions?
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
You say "I would like to understand the reasoning" for people paying high premiums. People have explained it to you over and over but you keep arguing it. If you want to just know the rationale than you know it. However you seem to not be able to accept people may have a different opinion than you.
If you say you can learn by viewing 100 examples of a type---sure. If you think you're even in the same league as JA from looking at 100 examplea-well I disagree.
People have NOT explained it to me over and over again. Actually the only one that was close to explaining it was WineSteve. He acknowledged that the difference in the grades are visible, slight but important to him. And that is the critical point I’ve made throughout this thread, why have slight differences driven premiums to extremes. One of the reasons is tag and CAC. Collectors have assign importance to this slight differences and look to CAC to validate those slight differences exist. In my opinion that’s missing the forest for the trees. You’ve got two coins that are 99% the same and the 1% is an extra ding or a very slight difference in luster that drives up the price 5x. That in my opinion is putting far to much emphasis on those slight differences. I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@Gazes said:
3) is it not permissible if a collector wants to have the very best coin even if that coin is only slightly better? Do you believe in a free market?
You falsely assume that a CAC coin is always the best coin. It is not. There are issues where the highest CACed coin is a grade or two below. Is a 66 CAC really superior to a 67 or 68 without a green bean? Definitely not in all cases. Maybe in select cases the lower grade coin is superior, but not all of them.
5)does it bother you when someone else pays for a Mercedes when they could by a cheaper car that gets you to the same place?
Comparing all CACed coins to a Mercedes is absurd. There are plenty of pedestrian CAC coins out there. Tobacco juice toned coins and early federal silver with scratches come to mind.
6) why is it that it bothers you so much what others do with their money?
It’s not so much what one person does with his money as the cumulative market distortions that result from group think.
I'm not calling you crazy or insane. Again, it's your money to spent and it's a very nice example. That said you acknowledge that the differences are visible but slight. Here is a 65 Peace Dollar that recently sold in a Heritage auction for $234. It's another nice example and while it may not be quite as nice as the 66 I think it's a very good representative of the coin. Personally I won't pay a 2x premium for a one point difference in grade for any coin because those differences just aren't that important to me. Even the idea of paying a major premium because a coin is MS versus a nice AU-58 is not something I do. I'll overlook some rub to avoid a major premium if I can still can a nice representative, a coin without major distractions that are claring even seen with the naked eye, even though I enjoy looking at details with a 10x loop and my microscope.
We agree with each other 100% that it’s fine that we (and others) each choose to buy at the grade and price that we choose to buy. However, what confuses me, are your replies from earlier today. You indicated that it’s crazy (or insane) that in some cases the cost to get the next higher grade point is 5x. It’s not crazy! That’s the reality of the market, and to some people, the reality is they’re comfortable both financially and psychologically spending that 5x to get that slight increase in quality and rarity for that higher grade. This post has gone on and on because of your expressed difficulty in not coming to terms with that latter point.
If you disagree with my interpretation of what I think you said, I suggest you go back to read your earlier comments characterizing the price differentials that are 5x before replying again.
Steve
This is the salient point: FREE MARKET!
Why is an ultra common Morgan dollar EVER worth more than melt? To non-collectors, it seems insane to pay a $100 for an low end unc 1881-S when there's a million of them out there. Who would EVER pay more than face value for an ultra common Jefferson nickel? EVER.
Why would anyone sink money into coins when they could MAKE money buying real estate or stocks? Why would anyone EVER try to fill in a date/mint mark set when all the coins look the same except for the date? Why would anyone EVER pay a premium for a chemically oxidized coin when a bright white pristine one is available?
THE MARKET, THE MARKET, THE MARKET.
None of those choices are anything but FREE CHOICES.
You have taken the position previously that the market is always right. Was it right the crash in 1989-1990 or after?
@pmh1nic said:
Pay up for quality??? Tell me what increase in quality there is between an MS-65 and MS-66 coin or better yet a 68 and 69. I don't begrudge anyone for how they spend there money but that doesn't mean the question isn't a valid question. You should be able to articulate the reasons for the 5x premium.
Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that you don’t understand why some people choose to pay up for an MS66 that cost 5x the cost of a “similar” looking MS65 (or MS69 instead of an MS68). While the TPG’s and CAC do make occasional errors, their experts in grading can indeed quantify those differences in quality. I find it sad that you can’t just be genuinely happy for those that choose to pay up for those differences, instead of being judgmental by thinking that the price differentials for these small quality increases is crazy or insane.
My above post sorrt of addresses this but I'll respond.
This has nothing to do with happiness. No one owes me an explanation for why they buy what they buy. I read post and respond because I have an opinion and conveying my opinion in writing forces me to consider and reconsider why I have a certain opinion.
When it comes to coin grading there are certain criteria involved in assigning a particular grade. Asking someone to articulate what the differences are between a 65 and 66 or 66 and 67 isn't being judgemental. You would hope the person paying a 5x premium for those differences can explain what those differences are that justified in their mind paying the premium. We don't have to agree on whether paying the premium is justified (their money, their choice) but we should be able to agree on what those differences are.
@pmh1nic You seemed obsessed with people buying top graded coins at higher prices. You ask alot of questions. Please answer these questions:
1) why do you care how others spend their money?
2) do you care as much when someone pays more for ticket to an event than face value?
3) is it not permissible if a collector wants to have the very best coin even if that coin is only slightly better? Do you believe in a free market?
4) is it possible to pay 5x premium as u say for the top pop and still make a profit but lose money if you had pay for the next grade down?
5)does it bother you when someone else pays for a Mercedes when they could by a cheaper car that gets you to the same place?
6) why is it that it bothers you so much what others do with their money?
7) what if someone told you paying over face value for any coin did not make sense? Would you listen to them? Would it offend you if they kept insisting it?
8) do you consider yourself an equal grader compared to JA?
Just a few questions. Please answer I can determine the merit of your position. Thanks
Obsessed? Not at all. We’re simply having a discussion about valuations.
You interpret my asking questions as caring (emotional). I don’t “care” on way or another but I’d like to understand the reasoning for why people are willing to pay high premiums for admittedly minor differences.
Again you use the word care as if I’m emotionally involved in the decision. Are they 50 feet from the stage or 500 feet. I might have an opinion about the value of the experience the are buying. I’d be interested in the reasoning.
This was addressed in a number of prior responses. Your money to be spent as you see fit.
We weren’t taking the issue of selling but buying. But that does one reason the premiums have gotten so high, together nd CAC sticker. That was part of my earlier comments.
5 - 7 Bother, bother and offend. All are dealing with an emotional response. You seem to be bothered and offended that I ask about the decision making process when someone pays a high premium for a coin. Why are you so emotionally invested in these questions?
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
You say "I would like to understand the reasoning" for people paying high premiums. People have explained it to you over and over but you keep arguing it. If you want to just know the rationale than you know it. However you seem to not be able to accept people may have a different opinion than you.
If you say you can learn by viewing 100 examples of a type---sure. If you think you're even in the same league as JA from looking at 100 examplea-well I disagree.
People have NOT explained it to me over and over again. Actually the only one that was close to explaining it was WineSteve. He acknowledged that the difference in the grades are visible, slight but important to him. And that is the critical point I’ve made throughout this thread, why have slight differences driven premiums to extremes. One of the reasons is tag and CAC. Collectors have assign importance to this slight differences and look to CAC to validate those slight differences exist. In my opinion that’s missing the forest for the trees. You’ve got two coins that are 99% the same and the 1% is an extra ding or a very slight difference in luster that drives up the price 5x. That in my opinion is putting far to much emphasis on those slight differences. I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
Yes, many collectors will pay huge multiples for coins that are only slightly different/better (or at least ones that they perceive as such). At the same time, numerous other collectors such as yourself, won’t pay the premiums and can’t understand why others do. As has already been posted, it’s about supply and demand and where each buyer chooses to draw the line regarding what amount of premium he’s willing to pay. It’s really not very complicated.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@pmh1nic said:
Grading isn't rocket science. I don't think the issue is really grading but name recognition. I think just about anyone could learn to grade very accurately after getting familiar with the standards for each grade, viewing 100 examples of a particular coin in various stages of preservation and given accurate feedback. I don't think you really learn that much more after viewing the next 100 or 1000 coins but I'd be interest in hearing what others think.
Quite a few very reputable and highly qualified dealers have had coins they think would CAC but don't!
That just further demonstrates the ridiculous nature of so called grading "standards" and the insanity in paying 5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.
I don’t know of any coins that are bought for “5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.” No need to exaggerate to try to make your point.
Are you sure he hasn't just revealed the fallacy that underlies his opinion?
1876 Liberty $20 MS-64 $45K, MS-65 $225K
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
I understand you’re point but a 3x premium for something “unique” still begs the question unique in want way. As far as a 64 to 65 both coins should be very nice examples of the coin in question. Both should have very good eye appeal. The 65 should have a few less marks or slightly better luster or a slightly better strike but essentially (can’t put numbers but let’s say 95% the same) they are the same coin with slight differences. As mentioned in another post, it’s not like we’re going from XF-45 to MS-65 where the coins are dramatically different. So fundamentally in your 64 to 65 example the uniqueness is based on minor differences. And where a 3x or higher premium is involved you now are looking for tpg and/or CAC to valid those minor differences exist. Collectors assigned very high values to minor differences and that created a need for third party validation. The problem isn’t the tag companies or CAC, the problem is collectors.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
You forgot MS-65+.
People care more as the grades go up. Think about this, how many grades are there between 45 and 50 vs. 65 and 70?
I'm not calling you crazy or insane. Again, it's your money to spent and it's a very nice example. That said you acknowledge that the differences are visible but slight. Here is a 65 Peace Dollar that recently sold in a Heritage auction for $234. It's another nice example and while it may not be quite as nice as the 66 I think it's a very good representative of the coin. Personally I won't pay a 2x premium for a one point difference in grade for any coin because those differences just aren't that important to me. Even the idea of paying a major premium because a coin is MS versus a nice AU-58 is not something I do. I'll overlook some rub to avoid a major premium if I can still can a nice representative, a coin without major distractions that are claring even seen with the naked eye, even though I enjoy looking at details with a 10x loop and my microscope.
We agree with each other 100% that it’s fine that we (and others) each choose to buy at the grade and price that we choose to buy. However, what confuses me, are your replies from earlier today. You indicated that it’s crazy (or insane) that in some cases the cost to get the next higher grade point is 5x. It’s not crazy! That’s the reality of the market, and to some people, the reality is they’re comfortable both financially and psychologically spending that 5x to get that slight increase in quality and rarity for that higher grade. This post has gone on and on because of your expressed difficulty in not coming to terms with that latter point.
If you disagree with my interpretation of what I think you said, I suggest you go back to read your earlier comments characterizing the price differentials that are 5x before replying again.
Steve
This is the salient point: FREE MARKET!
Why is an ultra common Morgan dollar EVER worth more than melt? To non-collectors, it seems insane to pay a $100 for an low end unc 1881-S when there's a million of them out there. Who would EVER pay more than face value for an ultra common Jefferson nickel? EVER.
Why would anyone sink money into coins when they could MAKE money buying real estate or stocks? Why would anyone EVER try to fill in a date/mint mark set when all the coins look the same except for the date? Why would anyone EVER pay a premium for a chemically oxidized coin when a bright white pristine one is available?
THE MARKET, THE MARKET, THE MARKET.
None of those choices are anything but FREE CHOICES.
You have taken the position previously that the market is always right. Was it right the crash in 1989-1990 or after?
Both. Conditions change, the market adjusts. Hopefully, it does so more gradually than 1989.
The rise in that period was driven by investment portfolios made possible by 3rd party grading. When the investment groups crashed, hard, the market crashed with them.
Market conditions do change. If investment groups still existed, MS65 Saints might be mid 5 figure coins. Look at the growth in stock market capitalization over the last 30 years and imagine that money chasing a fixed number of investment grade coins.
@pmh1nic said:
Pay up for quality??? Tell me what increase in quality there is between an MS-65 and MS-66 coin or better yet a 68 and 69. I don't begrudge anyone for how they spend there money but that doesn't mean the question isn't a valid question. You should be able to articulate the reasons for the 5x premium.
Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that you don’t understand why some people choose to pay up for an MS66 that cost 5x the cost of a “similar” looking MS65 (or MS69 instead of an MS68). While the TPG’s and CAC do make occasional errors, their experts in grading can indeed quantify those differences in quality. I find it sad that you can’t just be genuinely happy for those that choose to pay up for those differences, instead of being judgmental by thinking that the price differentials for these small quality increases is crazy or insane.
My above post sorrt of addresses this but I'll respond.
This has nothing to do with happiness. No one owes me an explanation for why they buy what they buy. I read post and respond because I have an opinion and conveying my opinion in writing forces me to consider and reconsider why I have a certain opinion.
When it comes to coin grading there are certain criteria involved in assigning a particular grade. Asking someone to articulate what the differences are between a 65 and 66 or 66 and 67 isn't being judgemental. You would hope the person paying a 5x premium for those differences can explain what those differences are that justified in their mind paying the premium. We don't have to agree on whether paying the premium is justified (their money, their choice) but we should be able to agree on what those differences are.
@pmh1nic You seemed obsessed with people buying top graded coins at higher prices. You ask alot of questions. Please answer these questions:
1) why do you care how others spend their money?
2) do you care as much when someone pays more for ticket to an event than face value?
3) is it not permissible if a collector wants to have the very best coin even if that coin is only slightly better? Do you believe in a free market?
4) is it possible to pay 5x premium as u say for the top pop and still make a profit but lose money if you had pay for the next grade down?
5)does it bother you when someone else pays for a Mercedes when they could by a cheaper car that gets you to the same place?
6) why is it that it bothers you so much what others do with their money?
7) what if someone told you paying over face value for any coin did not make sense? Would you listen to them? Would it offend you if they kept insisting it?
8) do you consider yourself an equal grader compared to JA?
Just a few questions. Please answer I can determine the merit of your position. Thanks
Obsessed? Not at all. We’re simply having a discussion about valuations.
You interpret my asking questions as caring (emotional). I don’t “care” on way or another but I’d like to understand the reasoning for why people are willing to pay high premiums for admittedly minor differences.
Again you use the word care as if I’m emotionally involved in the decision. Are they 50 feet from the stage or 500 feet. I might have an opinion about the value of the experience the are buying. I’d be interested in the reasoning.
This was addressed in a number of prior responses. Your money to be spent as you see fit.
We weren’t taking the issue of selling but buying. But that does one reason the premiums have gotten so high, together nd CAC sticker. That was part of my earlier comments.
5 - 7 Bother, bother and offend. All are dealing with an emotional response. You seem to be bothered and offended that I ask about the decision making process when someone pays a high premium for a coin. Why are you so emotionally invested in these questions?
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
You say "I would like to understand the reasoning" for people paying high premiums. People have explained it to you over and over but you keep arguing it. If you want to just know the rationale than you know it. However you seem to not be able to accept people may have a different opinion than you.
If you say you can learn by viewing 100 examples of a type---sure. If you think you're even in the same league as JA from looking at 100 examplea-well I disagree.
People have NOT explained it to me over and over again. Actually the only one that was close to explaining it was WineSteve. He acknowledged that the difference in the grades are visible, slight but important to him. And that is the critical point I’ve made throughout this thread, why have slight differences driven premiums to extremes. One of the reasons is tag and CAC. Collectors have assign importance to this slight differences and look to CAC to validate those slight differences exist. In my opinion that’s missing the forest for the trees. You’ve got two coins that are 99% the same and the 1% is an extra ding or a very slight difference in luster that drives up the price 5x. That in my opinion is putting far to much emphasis on those slight differences. I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
Yes, many collectors will pay huge multiples for coins that are only slightly different/better (or at least ones that they perceive as such). At the same time, numerous other collectors such as yourself, won’t pay the premiums and can’t understand why others do. As has already been posted, it’s about supply and demand and where each buyer chooses to draw the line regarding what amount of premium he’s willing to pay. It’s really not very complicated.
I understand supply and demand. The question is why the demand? Someone mentioned that the one 66 is unique. The question then becomes unique in what way? The answer is unique in very slight ways which is back to putting a huge amount of emphasis on very minor details. Of course everyone is free to assign value as they choose but understand that when you pay a 3x premium you have assign value (excessive in my opinion) to minor issues. It then becomes critical that a tpg company and/or CAC validates those differences.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
I really am a live and let live person.
You really aren't. A live and let live person wouldn't care why others had different preferences, and wouldn't continue to offer arguments as to why they're wrong.
@pmh1nic said:
Grading isn't rocket science. I don't think the issue is really grading but name recognition. I think just about anyone could learn to grade very accurately after getting familiar with the standards for each grade, viewing 100 examples of a particular coin in various stages of preservation and given accurate feedback. I don't think you really learn that much more after viewing the next 100 or 1000 coins but I'd be interest in hearing what others think.
Quite a few very reputable and highly qualified dealers have had coins they think would CAC but don't!
That just further demonstrates the ridiculous nature of so called grading "standards" and the insanity in paying 5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.
I don’t know of any coins that are bought for “5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.” No need to exaggerate to try to make your point.
Are you sure he hasn't just revealed the fallacy that underlies his opinion?
1876 Liberty $20 MS-64 $45K, MS-65 $225K
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
I understand you’re point but a 3x premium for something “unique” still begs the question unique in want way. As far as a 64 to 65 both coins should be very nice examples of the coin in question. Both should have very good eye appeal. The 65 should have a few less marks or slightly better luster or a slightly better strike but essentially (can’t put numbers but let’s say 95% the same) they are the same coin with slight differences. As mentioned in another post, it’s not like we’re going from XF-45 to MS-65 where the coins are dramatically different. So fundamentally in your 64 to 65 example the uniqueness is based on minor differences. And where a 3x or higher premium is involved you now are looking for tpg and/or CAC to valid those minor differences exist. Collectors assigned very high values to minor differences and that created a need for third party validation. The problem isn’t the tag companies or CAC, the problem is collectors.
The PROBLEM isn't collectors. The MARKET is collectors.
Again, you don't agree with the market. Fine. But the REASON for the value difference is easy and obvious to understand. Stop pretending that you are just asking the question. You are arguing a position.
And the fact is, you can call it a "minor" difference if you want, but it is a difference. A difference that even a chimp like me can see and appreciate. A difference that richer chimps than I are willing to pay to acquire.
You could replace the green CAC sticker with the words "monster/rainbow toning" and you would get similar responses. Some people will pay large premiums for that, others just mumble and tell you they will give you 80% of bid. You just have to know your target audience for selling your coins, whether it's the CAC bean, some outrageous attractive toning or just an attractive coin for the grade.
@pmh1nic said:
Pay up for quality??? Tell me what increase in quality there is between an MS-65 and MS-66 coin or better yet a 68 and 69. I don't begrudge anyone for how they spend there money but that doesn't mean the question isn't a valid question. You should be able to articulate the reasons for the 5x premium.
Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that you don’t understand why some people choose to pay up for an MS66 that cost 5x the cost of a “similar” looking MS65 (or MS69 instead of an MS68). While the TPG’s and CAC do make occasional errors, their experts in grading can indeed quantify those differences in quality. I find it sad that you can’t just be genuinely happy for those that choose to pay up for those differences, instead of being judgmental by thinking that the price differentials for these small quality increases is crazy or insane.
My above post sorrt of addresses this but I'll respond.
This has nothing to do with happiness. No one owes me an explanation for why they buy what they buy. I read post and respond because I have an opinion and conveying my opinion in writing forces me to consider and reconsider why I have a certain opinion.
When it comes to coin grading there are certain criteria involved in assigning a particular grade. Asking someone to articulate what the differences are between a 65 and 66 or 66 and 67 isn't being judgemental. You would hope the person paying a 5x premium for those differences can explain what those differences are that justified in their mind paying the premium. We don't have to agree on whether paying the premium is justified (their money, their choice) but we should be able to agree on what those differences are.
@pmh1nic You seemed obsessed with people buying top graded coins at higher prices. You ask alot of questions. Please answer these questions:
1) why do you care how others spend their money?
2) do you care as much when someone pays more for ticket to an event than face value?
3) is it not permissible if a collector wants to have the very best coin even if that coin is only slightly better? Do you believe in a free market?
4) is it possible to pay 5x premium as u say for the top pop and still make a profit but lose money if you had pay for the next grade down?
5)does it bother you when someone else pays for a Mercedes when they could by a cheaper car that gets you to the same place?
6) why is it that it bothers you so much what others do with their money?
7) what if someone told you paying over face value for any coin did not make sense? Would you listen to them? Would it offend you if they kept insisting it?
8) do you consider yourself an equal grader compared to JA?
Just a few questions. Please answer I can determine the merit of your position. Thanks
Obsessed? Not at all. We’re simply having a discussion about valuations.
You interpret my asking questions as caring (emotional). I don’t “care” on way or another but I’d like to understand the reasoning for why people are willing to pay high premiums for admittedly minor differences.
Again you use the word care as if I’m emotionally involved in the decision. Are they 50 feet from the stage or 500 feet. I might have an opinion about the value of the experience the are buying. I’d be interested in the reasoning.
This was addressed in a number of prior responses. Your money to be spent as you see fit.
We weren’t taking the issue of selling but buying. But that does one reason the premiums have gotten so high, together nd CAC sticker. That was part of my earlier comments.
5 - 7 Bother, bother and offend. All are dealing with an emotional response. You seem to be bothered and offended that I ask about the decision making process when someone pays a high premium for a coin. Why are you so emotionally invested in these questions?
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
You say "I would like to understand the reasoning" for people paying high premiums. People have explained it to you over and over but you keep arguing it. If you want to just know the rationale than you know it. However you seem to not be able to accept people may have a different opinion than you.
If you say you can learn by viewing 100 examples of a type---sure. If you think you're even in the same league as JA from looking at 100 examplea-well I disagree.
People have NOT explained it to me over and over again. Actually the only one that was close to explaining it was WineSteve. He acknowledged that the difference in the grades are visible, slight but important to him. And that is the critical point I’ve made throughout this thread, why have slight differences driven premiums to extremes. One of the reasons is tag and CAC. Collectors have assign importance to this slight differences and look to CAC to validate those slight differences exist. In my opinion that’s missing the forest for the trees. You’ve got two coins that are 99% the same and the 1% is an extra ding or a very slight difference in luster that drives up the price 5x. That in my opinion is putting far to much emphasis on those slight differences. I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
Yes, many collectors will pay huge multiples for coins that are only slightly different/better (or at least ones that they perceive as such). At the same time, numerous other collectors such as yourself, won’t pay the premiums and can’t understand why others do. As has already been posted, it’s about supply and demand and where each buyer chooses to draw the line regarding what amount of premium he’s willing to pay. It’s really not very complicated.
I understand supply and demand. The question is why the demand? Someone mentioned that the one 66 is unique. The question then becomes unique in what way? The answer is unique in very slight ways which is back to putting a huge amount of emphasis on very minor details. Of course everyone is free to assign value as they choose but understand that when you pay a 3x premium you have assign value (excessive in my opinion) to minor issues. It then becomes critical that a tpg company and/or CAC validates those differences.
Why does a 1916-D Merc dime in AG sell for more than a 1916 dime in UNC? The minor difference favors the 16-D. The major differences favor the 16. But more people (demand) favor the 1916-D.
The market has decided. Accept the decision and profit. Deny the decision and make yourself and everyone else miserable.
@pmh1nic said:
I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
You forgot MS-65+.
People care more as the grades go up. Think about this, how many grades are there between 45 and 50 vs. 65 and 70?
It’s not the number so much as what the number represents. To take it to an extreme, if I show an example of a 45 and 65 to my 10 year old grandson and ask him to describe the differences between the coins even his inexperienced eye will pick out quite a few differences. If I show him a 65 and 66 he’ll probably think these are the same coins. If I asked him which would you rather have my guess is he say either one is fine. They’re both great examples of the coin. How do we get from that to paying 5x for one over the other? We have assigned tremendous value to minor issues.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
Pay up for quality??? Tell me what increase in quality there is between an MS-65 and MS-66 coin or better yet a 68 and 69. I don't begrudge anyone for how they spend there money but that doesn't mean the question isn't a valid question. You should be able to articulate the reasons for the 5x premium.
Yes, you’ve made it quite clear that you don’t understand why some people choose to pay up for an MS66 that cost 5x the cost of a “similar” looking MS65 (or MS69 instead of an MS68). While the TPG’s and CAC do make occasional errors, their experts in grading can indeed quantify those differences in quality. I find it sad that you can’t just be genuinely happy for those that choose to pay up for those differences, instead of being judgmental by thinking that the price differentials for these small quality increases is crazy or insane.
My above post sorrt of addresses this but I'll respond.
This has nothing to do with happiness. No one owes me an explanation for why they buy what they buy. I read post and respond because I have an opinion and conveying my opinion in writing forces me to consider and reconsider why I have a certain opinion.
When it comes to coin grading there are certain criteria involved in assigning a particular grade. Asking someone to articulate what the differences are between a 65 and 66 or 66 and 67 isn't being judgemental. You would hope the person paying a 5x premium for those differences can explain what those differences are that justified in their mind paying the premium. We don't have to agree on whether paying the premium is justified (their money, their choice) but we should be able to agree on what those differences are.
@pmh1nic You seemed obsessed with people buying top graded coins at higher prices. You ask alot of questions. Please answer these questions:
1) why do you care how others spend their money?
2) do you care as much when someone pays more for ticket to an event than face value?
3) is it not permissible if a collector wants to have the very best coin even if that coin is only slightly better? Do you believe in a free market?
4) is it possible to pay 5x premium as u say for the top pop and still make a profit but lose money if you had pay for the next grade down?
5)does it bother you when someone else pays for a Mercedes when they could by a cheaper car that gets you to the same place?
6) why is it that it bothers you so much what others do with their money?
7) what if someone told you paying over face value for any coin did not make sense? Would you listen to them? Would it offend you if they kept insisting it?
8) do you consider yourself an equal grader compared to JA?
Just a few questions. Please answer I can determine the merit of your position. Thanks
Obsessed? Not at all. We’re simply having a discussion about valuations.
You interpret my asking questions as caring (emotional). I don’t “care” on way or another but I’d like to understand the reasoning for why people are willing to pay high premiums for admittedly minor differences.
Again you use the word care as if I’m emotionally involved in the decision. Are they 50 feet from the stage or 500 feet. I might have an opinion about the value of the experience the are buying. I’d be interested in the reasoning.
This was addressed in a number of prior responses. Your money to be spent as you see fit.
We weren’t taking the issue of selling but buying. But that does one reason the premiums have gotten so high, together nd CAC sticker. That was part of my earlier comments.
5 - 7 Bother, bother and offend. All are dealing with an emotional response. You seem to be bothered and offended that I ask about the decision making process when someone pays a high premium for a coin. Why are you so emotionally invested in these questions?
I never suggested I was on the same level in grading skills as JA. I did suggest that grading isn’t rocket science and that you could learn a lot (probably most) about grading a specific type of coin by viewing 100 examples of that type in various conditions with the proper feedback. No one has challenged that assertion.
You say "I would like to understand the reasoning" for people paying high premiums. People have explained it to you over and over but you keep arguing it. If you want to just know the rationale than you know it. However you seem to not be able to accept people may have a different opinion than you.
If you say you can learn by viewing 100 examples of a type---sure. If you think you're even in the same league as JA from looking at 100 examplea-well I disagree.
People have NOT explained it to me over and over again. Actually the only one that was close to explaining it was WineSteve. He acknowledged that the difference in the grades are visible, slight but important to him. And that is the critical point I’ve made throughout this thread, why have slight differences driven premiums to extremes. One of the reasons is tag and CAC. Collectors have assign importance to this slight differences and look to CAC to validate those slight differences exist. In my opinion that’s missing the forest for the trees. You’ve got two coins that are 99% the same and the 1% is an extra ding or a very slight difference in luster that drives up the price 5x. That in my opinion is putting far to much emphasis on those slight differences. I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
Yes, many collectors will pay huge multiples for coins that are only slightly different/better (or at least ones that they perceive as such). At the same time, numerous other collectors such as yourself, won’t pay the premiums and can’t understand why others do. As has already been posted, it’s about supply and demand and where each buyer chooses to draw the line regarding what amount of premium he’s willing to pay. It’s really not very complicated.
I understand supply and demand. The question is why the demand? Someone mentioned that the one 66 is unique. The question then becomes unique in what way? The answer is unique in very slight ways which is back to putting a huge amount of emphasis on very minor details. Of course everyone is free to assign value as they choose but understand that when you pay a 3x premium you have assign value (excessive in my opinion) to minor issues. It then becomes critical that a tpg company and/or CAC validates those differences.
Ok----you dont get demand you say. Tell you what, I will take the ms66 at a small premium and everyone else can take the 65. Problem solved
@pmh1nic said:
I really am a live and let live person.
You really aren't. A live and let live person wouldn't care why others had different preferences, and wouldn't continue to offer arguments as to why they're wrong.
Wrong, a live and let live person may want to know the reason you make a choice but they don’t stand in the way of your making that choice. If my questions and answer become an obstruction to you the problem isn’t my questions.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
Wrong, a live and let live person may want to know the reason you make a choice but they don’t stand in the way of your making that choice.
People have been giving you a reason and you continue to argue with them over it.
@pmh1nic said:
Grading isn't rocket science. I don't think the issue is really grading but name recognition. I think just about anyone could learn to grade very accurately after getting familiar with the standards for each grade, viewing 100 examples of a particular coin in various stages of preservation and given accurate feedback. I don't think you really learn that much more after viewing the next 100 or 1000 coins but I'd be interest in hearing what others think.
Quite a few very reputable and highly qualified dealers have had coins they think would CAC but don't!
That just further demonstrates the ridiculous nature of so called grading "standards" and the insanity in paying 5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.
I don’t know of any coins that are bought for “5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.” No need to exaggerate to try to make your point.
Are you sure he hasn't just revealed the fallacy that underlies his opinion?
1876 Liberty $20 MS-64 $45K, MS-65 $225K
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
I understand you’re point but a 3x premium for something “unique” still begs the question unique in want way. As far as a 64 to 65 both coins should be very nice examples of the coin in question. Both should have very good eye appeal. The 65 should have a few less marks or slightly better luster or a slightly better strike but essentially (can’t put numbers but let’s say 95% the same) they are the same coin with slight differences. As mentioned in another post, it’s not like we’re going from XF-45 to MS-65 where the coins are dramatically different. So fundamentally in your 64 to 65 example the uniqueness is based on minor differences. And where a 3x or higher premium is involved you now are looking for tpg and/or CAC to valid those minor differences exist. Collectors assigned very high values to minor differences and that created a need for third party validation. The problem isn’t the tag companies or CAC, the problem is collectors.
Here is another possible answer to your question why a 64 and 65 be as you say "95%" the same and have such different prices. Maybe you are not as good a grader as you think you are and a better grader sees the coins differently than you. In other words, one is clearly superior. Not trying to be insulting but trying to answer your question.
I'm not calling you crazy or insane. Again, it's your money to spent and it's a very nice example. That said you acknowledge that the differences are visible but slight. Here is a 65 Peace Dollar that recently sold in a Heritage auction for $234. It's another nice example and while it may not be quite as nice as the 66 I think it's a very good representative of the coin. Personally I won't pay a 2x premium for a one point difference in grade for any coin because those differences just aren't that important to me. Even the idea of paying a major premium because a coin is MS versus a nice AU-58 is not something I do. I'll overlook some rub to avoid a major premium if I can still can a nice representative, a coin without major distractions that are claring even seen with the naked eye, even though I enjoy looking at details with a 10x loop and my microscope.
We agree with each other 100% that it’s fine that we (and others) each choose to buy at the grade and price that we choose to buy. However, what confuses me, are your replies from earlier today. You indicated that it’s crazy (or insane) that in some cases the cost to get the next higher grade point is 5x. It’s not crazy! That’s the reality of the market, and to some people, the reality is they’re comfortable both financially and psychologically spending that 5x to get that slight increase in quality and rarity for that higher grade. This post has gone on and on because of your expressed difficulty in not coming to terms with that latter point.
If you disagree with my interpretation of what I think you said, I suggest you go back to read your earlier comments characterizing the price differentials that are 5x before replying again.
Steve
This is the salient point: FREE MARKET!
Why is an ultra common Morgan dollar EVER worth more than melt? To non-collectors, it seems insane to pay a $100 for an low end unc 1881-S when there's a million of them out there. Who would EVER pay more than face value for an ultra common Jefferson nickel? EVER.
Why would anyone sink money into coins when they could MAKE money buying real estate or stocks? Why would anyone EVER try to fill in a date/mint mark set when all the coins look the same except for the date? Why would anyone EVER pay a premium for a chemically oxidized coin when a bright white pristine one is available?
THE MARKET, THE MARKET, THE MARKET.
None of those choices are anything but FREE CHOICES.
You have taken the position previously that the market is always right. Was it right the crash in 1989-1990 or after?
Both. Conditions change, the market adjusts. Hopefully, it does so more gradually than 1989.
The rise in that period was driven by investment portfolios made possible by 3rd party grading. When the investment groups crashed, hard, the market crashed with them.
Market conditions do change. If investment groups still existed, MS65 Saints might be mid 5 figure coins. Look at the growth in stock market capitalization over the last 30 years and imagine that money chasing a fixed number of investment grade coins.
The market cannot be always be correct and be prone to sharp corrections. Market conditions change but not that rapidly.
@pmh1nic said:
Grading isn't rocket science. I don't think the issue is really grading but name recognition. I think just about anyone could learn to grade very accurately after getting familiar with the standards for each grade, viewing 100 examples of a particular coin in various stages of preservation and given accurate feedback. I don't think you really learn that much more after viewing the next 100 or 1000 coins but I'd be interest in hearing what others think.
Quite a few very reputable and highly qualified dealers have had coins they think would CAC but don't!
That just further demonstrates the ridiculous nature of so called grading "standards" and the insanity in paying 5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.
I don’t know of any coins that are bought for “5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.” No need to exaggerate to try to make your point.
Are you sure he hasn't just revealed the fallacy that underlies his opinion?
1876 Liberty $20 MS-64 $45K, MS-65 $225K
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
I understand you’re point but a 3x premium for something “unique” still begs the question unique in want way. As far as a 64 to 65 both coins should be very nice examples of the coin in question. Both should have very good eye appeal. The 65 should have a few less marks or slightly better luster or a slightly better strike but essentially (can’t put numbers but let’s say 95% the same) they are the same coin with slight differences. As mentioned in another post, it’s not like we’re going from XF-45 to MS-65 where the coins are dramatically different. So fundamentally in your 64 to 65 example the uniqueness is based on minor differences. And where a 3x or higher premium is involved you now are looking for tpg and/or CAC to valid those minor differences exist. Collectors assigned very high values to minor differences and that created a need for third party validation. The problem isn’t the tag companies or CAC, the problem is collectors.
The PROBLEM isn't collectors. The MARKET is collectors.
Again, you don't agree with the market. Fine. But the REASON for the value difference is easy and obvious to understand. Stop pretending that you are just asking the question. You are arguing a position.
And the fact is, you can call it a "minor" difference if you want, but it is a difference. A difference that even a chimp like me can see and appreciate. A difference that richer chimps than I are willing to pay to acquire.
Do you read what you write. The problem isn’t collectors but the market is collectors…smh.
Yes, I understand the reasons for the premiums and it should be absolutely clear to anyone that’s been reading my post that I understand why the premiums exist.
It’s not just me calling them minor differences. People paying the premiums call them slight differences. You are the king of strawman arguments. When did I ever say those minor differences don’t exist or couldn’t be identified? You seem to make up arguments in your mind that don’t exist and then assign them to others.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
You forgot MS-65+.
People care more as the grades go up. Think about this, how many grades are there between 45 and 50 vs. 65 and 70?
It’s not the number so much as what the number represents. To take it to an extreme, if I show an example of a 45 and 65 to my 10 year old grandson and ask him to describe the differences between the coins even his inexperienced eye will pick out quite a few differences. If I show him a 65 and 66 he’ll probably think these are the same coins. If I asked him which would you rather have my guess is he say either one is fine. They’re both great examples of the coin. How do we get from that to paying 5x for one over the other? We have assigned tremendous value to minor issues.
Why do some diamonds, which have very minor differnces, but look the same to unknowledgeable viewers, sell for many multiples of others? Because some buyers can see the differences and are willing to pay for it. And/or because the diamonds have been graded and many buyers rely upon that grading.
Some coin buyers, who pay huge premiums for extremely minor differences in quality and/or eye-appeal, end up getting badly burned. Others do very well. Some collectors are willing to take the risk, while others aren’t. I realize you’re in the latter category and have no problem understanding it. I don’t see why you can’t (or refuse’ to understand that some collectors have a very different mindset from yours.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I'm not calling you crazy or insane. Again, it's your money to spent and it's a very nice example. That said you acknowledge that the differences are visible but slight. Here is a 65 Peace Dollar that recently sold in a Heritage auction for $234. It's another nice example and while it may not be quite as nice as the 66 I think it's a very good representative of the coin. Personally I won't pay a 2x premium for a one point difference in grade for any coin because those differences just aren't that important to me. Even the idea of paying a major premium because a coin is MS versus a nice AU-58 is not something I do. I'll overlook some rub to avoid a major premium if I can still can a nice representative, a coin without major distractions that are claring even seen with the naked eye, even though I enjoy looking at details with a 10x loop and my microscope.
We agree with each other 100% that it’s fine that we (and others) each choose to buy at the grade and price that we choose to buy. However, what confuses me, are your replies from earlier today. You indicated that it’s crazy (or insane) that in some cases the cost to get the next higher grade point is 5x. It’s not crazy! That’s the reality of the market, and to some people, the reality is they’re comfortable both financially and psychologically spending that 5x to get that slight increase in quality and rarity for that higher grade. This post has gone on and on because of your expressed difficulty in not coming to terms with that latter point.
If you disagree with my interpretation of what I think you said, I suggest you go back to read your earlier comments characterizing the price differentials that are 5x before replying again.
Steve
This is the salient point: FREE MARKET!
Why is an ultra common Morgan dollar EVER worth more than melt? To non-collectors, it seems insane to pay a $100 for an low end unc 1881-S when there's a million of them out there. Who would EVER pay more than face value for an ultra common Jefferson nickel? EVER.
Why would anyone sink money into coins when they could MAKE money buying real estate or stocks? Why would anyone EVER try to fill in a date/mint mark set when all the coins look the same except for the date? Why would anyone EVER pay a premium for a chemically oxidized coin when a bright white pristine one is available?
THE MARKET, THE MARKET, THE MARKET.
None of those choices are anything but FREE CHOICES.
You have taken the position previously that the market is always right. Was it right the crash in 1989-1990 or after?
Both. Conditions change, the market adjusts. Hopefully, it does so more gradually than 1989.
The rise in that period was driven by investment portfolios made possible by 3rd party grading. When the investment groups crashed, hard, the market crashed with them.
Market conditions do change. If investment groups still existed, MS65 Saints might be mid 5 figure coins. Look at the growth in stock market capitalization over the last 30 years and imagine that money chasing a fixed number of investment grade coins.
The market cannot be always be correct and be prone to sharp corrections. Market conditions change but not that rapidly.
They did in 1989. Wasn't there legal action against one of the investment portfolios? Almost overnight, the investment groups vanished which caused supply to surge and demand to dry up.
Are you suggesting that the market is incorrectly priced if a nuclear exchange between the US and China caused a sudden collapse?
And the coin market can hardly be said to be "prone to sharp corrections" when it happened once in 150 years.
@pmh1nic said:
Grading isn't rocket science. I don't think the issue is really grading but name recognition. I think just about anyone could learn to grade very accurately after getting familiar with the standards for each grade, viewing 100 examples of a particular coin in various stages of preservation and given accurate feedback. I don't think you really learn that much more after viewing the next 100 or 1000 coins but I'd be interest in hearing what others think.
Quite a few very reputable and highly qualified dealers have had coins they think would CAC but don't!
That just further demonstrates the ridiculous nature of so called grading "standards" and the insanity in paying 5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.
I don’t know of any coins that are bought for “5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.” No need to exaggerate to try to make your point.
Are you sure he hasn't just revealed the fallacy that underlies his opinion?
1876 Liberty $20 MS-64 $45K, MS-65 $225K
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
I understand you’re point but a 3x premium for something “unique” still begs the question unique in want way. As far as a 64 to 65 both coins should be very nice examples of the coin in question. Both should have very good eye appeal. The 65 should have a few less marks or slightly better luster or a slightly better strike but essentially (can’t put numbers but let’s say 95% the same) they are the same coin with slight differences. As mentioned in another post, it’s not like we’re going from XF-45 to MS-65 where the coins are dramatically different. So fundamentally in your 64 to 65 example the uniqueness is based on minor differences. And where a 3x or higher premium is involved you now are looking for tpg and/or CAC to valid those minor differences exist. Collectors assigned very high values to minor differences and that created a need for third party validation. The problem isn’t the tag companies or CAC, the problem is collectors.
Here is another possible answer to your question why a 64 and 65 be as you say "95%" the same and have such different prices. Maybe you are not as good a grader as you think you are and a better grader sees the coins differently than you. In other words, one is clearly superior. Not trying to be insulting but trying to answer your question.
This has nothing to do with my ability to grade. I’ll accept the tpg assessment of a 65 and 66 grade. You tell me since you’re so well versed what are the technical differences that define those grades? They will be slight differences in strike, luster, size and location of marks. Feel free to expand.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
Grading isn't rocket science. I don't think the issue is really grading but name recognition. I think just about anyone could learn to grade very accurately after getting familiar with the standards for each grade, viewing 100 examples of a particular coin in various stages of preservation and given accurate feedback. I don't think you really learn that much more after viewing the next 100 or 1000 coins but I'd be interest in hearing what others think.
Quite a few very reputable and highly qualified dealers have had coins they think would CAC but don't!
That just further demonstrates the ridiculous nature of so called grading "standards" and the insanity in paying 5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.
I don’t know of any coins that are bought for “5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.” No need to exaggerate to try to make your point.
Are you sure he hasn't just revealed the fallacy that underlies his opinion?
1876 Liberty $20 MS-64 $45K, MS-65 $225K
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
I understand you’re point but a 3x premium for something “unique” still begs the question unique in want way. As far as a 64 to 65 both coins should be very nice examples of the coin in question. Both should have very good eye appeal. The 65 should have a few less marks or slightly better luster or a slightly better strike but essentially (can’t put numbers but let’s say 95% the same) they are the same coin with slight differences. As mentioned in another post, it’s not like we’re going from XF-45 to MS-65 where the coins are dramatically different. So fundamentally in your 64 to 65 example the uniqueness is based on minor differences. And where a 3x or higher premium is involved you now are looking for tpg and/or CAC to valid those minor differences exist. Collectors assigned very high values to minor differences and that created a need for third party validation. The problem isn’t the tag companies or CAC, the problem is collectors.
The PROBLEM isn't collectors. The MARKET is collectors.
Again, you don't agree with the market. Fine. But the REASON for the value difference is easy and obvious to understand. Stop pretending that you are just asking the question. You are arguing a position.
And the fact is, you can call it a "minor" difference if you want, but it is a difference. A difference that even a chimp like me can see and appreciate. A difference that richer chimps than I are willing to pay to acquire.
Do you read what you write. The problem isn’t collectors but the market is collectors…smh.
Yes, I understand the reasons for the premiums and it should be absolutely clear to anyone that’s been reading my post that I understand why the premiums exist.
It’s not just me calling them minor differences. People paying the premiums call them slight differences. You are the king of strawman arguments. When did I ever say those minor differences don’t exist or couldn’t be identified? You seem to make up arguments in your mind that don’t exist and then assign them to others.
I did not say what you suggested I said. YOU said that the "problem was collectors". I corrected YOUR sentence because it isn't a "problem" just because YOU call it a problem.
I also NEVER SAID that you said those minor differences don't exist. QUITE THE CONTRARY, I acknowledged that you said "minor differences" exist but pointed out that we can see those minor differences and people value those differences.
Please reread what I wrote more carefully. I will happily accept you apology when it comes.
@pmh1nic said:
Grading isn't rocket science. I don't think the issue is really grading but name recognition. I think just about anyone could learn to grade very accurately after getting familiar with the standards for each grade, viewing 100 examples of a particular coin in various stages of preservation and given accurate feedback. I don't think you really learn that much more after viewing the next 100 or 1000 coins but I'd be interest in hearing what others think.
Quite a few very reputable and highly qualified dealers have had coins they think would CAC but don't!
That just further demonstrates the ridiculous nature of so called grading "standards" and the insanity in paying 5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.
I don’t know of any coins that are bought for “5x and higher premiums for one individuals opinion on a grade.” No need to exaggerate to try to make your point.
Are you sure he hasn't just revealed the fallacy that underlies his opinion?
1876 Liberty $20 MS-64 $45K, MS-65 $225K
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
I understand you’re point but a 3x premium for something “unique” still begs the question unique in want way. As far as a 64 to 65 both coins should be very nice examples of the coin in question. Both should have very good eye appeal. The 65 should have a few less marks or slightly better luster or a slightly better strike but essentially (can’t put numbers but let’s say 95% the same) they are the same coin with slight differences. As mentioned in another post, it’s not like we’re going from XF-45 to MS-65 where the coins are dramatically different. So fundamentally in your 64 to 65 example the uniqueness is based on minor differences. And where a 3x or higher premium is involved you now are looking for tpg and/or CAC to valid those minor differences exist. Collectors assigned very high values to minor differences and that created a need for third party validation. The problem isn’t the tag companies or CAC, the problem is collectors.
Here is another possible answer to your question why a 64 and 65 be as you say "95%" the same and have such different prices. Maybe you are not as good a grader as you think you are and a better grader sees the coins differently than you. In other words, one is clearly superior. Not trying to be insulting but trying to answer your question.
This has nothing to do with my ability to grade. I’ll accept the tpg assessment of a 65 and 66 grade. You tell me since you’re so well versed what are the technical differences that define those grades? They will be slight differences in strike, luster, size and location of marks. Feel free to expand.
I'll stick with my answers and the other couple dozen answers people have given you. Enjoy your day.
@pmh1nic said:
I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
You forgot MS-65+.
People care more as the grades go up. Think about this, how many grades are there between 45 and 50 vs. 65 and 70?
It’s not the number so much as what the number represents. To take it to an extreme, if I show an example of a 45 and 65 to my 10 year old grandson and ask him to describe the differences between the coins even his inexperienced eye will pick out quite a few differences. If I show him a 65 and 66 he’ll probably think these are the same coins. If I asked him which would you rather have my guess is he say either one is fine. They’re both great examples of the coin. How do we get from that to paying 5x for one over the other? We have assigned tremendous value to minor issues.
Why do some diamonds, which have very minor differnces, but look the same to unknowledgeable viewers, sell for many multiples of others? Because some buyers can see the differences and are willing to pay for it. And/or because the diamonds have been graded and many buyers rely upon that grading.
Some coin buyers, who pay huge premiums for extremely minor differences in quality and/or eye-appeal, end up getting badly burned. Others do very well. Some collectors are willing to take the risk, while others aren’t. I realize you’re in the latter category and have no problem understanding it. I don’t see why you can’t (or refuse’ to understand that some collectors have a very different mindset from yours.
@BillJones said:
The choir continues to sing and circle the wagons. You win. I am mostly done with U.S. coins.
tell me if my assumption is wrong - a lot of your collection hasn't been to CAC - since you have a good eye, a lot of your collection will probably get beaned at some point in the future
The collection might get beaned when it comes time to sell. That will be a discussion between the auction house and me. My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
I have coins that would never bean. I knew that when I bought a couple of them because they were over graded in the holder. The reason was that they rare coins which fit in wit the rest of my sets. For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned. That coin was what my old economics professor called "a consumption act." It's like buying new car, a good bottle of Scotch or a fancy meal at a restaurant. I bought it because I am enjoying it.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@Gazes said:
My thoughts on my participation in CAC threads
[...]
Given all this, the rationale decision for me is not to waste more time on these discussions.
The perfect solution to not post in other people's CAC threads is to make your own
@pmh1nic said:
I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
You forgot MS-65+.
People care more as the grades go up. Think about this, how many grades are there between 45 and 50 vs. 65 and 70?
It’s not the number so much as what the number represents. To take it to an extreme, if I show an example of a 45 and 65 to my 10 year old grandson and ask him to describe the differences between the coins even his inexperienced eye will pick out quite a few differences. If I show him a 65 and 66 he’ll probably think these are the same coins. If I asked him which would you rather have my guess is he say either one is fine. They’re both great examples of the coin. How do we get from that to paying 5x for one over the other? We have assigned tremendous value to minor issues.
Why do some diamonds, which have very minor differnces, but look the same to unknowledgeable viewers, sell for many multiples of others? Because some buyers can see the differences and are willing to pay for it. And/or because the diamonds have been graded and many buyers rely upon that grading.
Some coin buyers, who pay huge premiums for extremely minor differences in quality and/or eye-appeal, end up getting badly burned. Others do very well. Some collectors are willing to take the risk, while others aren’t. I realize you’re in the latter category and have no problem understanding it. I don’t see why you can’t (or refuse’ to understand that some collectors have a very different mindset from yours.
We understand that individuals will pay “huge premiums for extremely minor differences”. And because they are paying huge premiums for “extremely minor differences” they require third parties to validate that those differences exist. They then tout the idea that those “extremely minor differences” are to be the focus rather than the 99% of the coin that is the same in the coin that is ranked 1 point lower. Ignore the 99% and focus on the 1%. I say focus on the 99% and ignore the 1%. It’s missing the forest because you’re obsessed with one tree.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@BillJones said:
The choir continues to sing and circle the wagons. You win. I am mostly done with U.S. coins.
tell me if my assumption is wrong - a lot of your collection hasn't been to CAC - since you have a good eye, a lot of your collection will probably get beaned at some point in the future
The collection might get beaned when it comes time to sell. That will be a discussion between the auction house and me. My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
I have coins that would never bean. I knew that when I bought a couple of them because they were over graded in the holder. The reason was that they rare coins which fit in wit the rest of my sets. For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned. That coin was what my old economics professor called "a consumption act." It's like buying new car, a good bottle of Scotch or a fancy meal at a restaurant. I bought it because I am enjoying it.
So you bought a coin in a Ms-61 holder that really is an au 55 or 58 and wont bean---seems like CAC did exactly what it was suppose to do and protect the next buyer of the coin.
@BillJones said:
My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned.
How is JA pulling any strings with regards to a coin you recognize as having been overgraded?
@pmh1nic said:
Ignore the 99% and focus on the 1%. I say focus on the 99% and ignore the 1%. It’s missing the forest because you’re obsessed with one tree.
A "live and let live" guy wouldn't tell somebody else what to focus on, and what to ignore.
If I wait long enough, that AU in the MS-61 holder might get a green bean. “Grade-flatiron” has made such items into market acceptable Mint State coins, and CAC has beaned some of them. Remember CAC beans the coins they are willing to buy, and that has included pieces pushed via grade-flatiron.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@BillJones said:
My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned.
How is JA pulling any strings with regards to a coin you recognize as having been overgraded?
It makes no sense to say that the coin is "condemned" because it is a au 55 coin in a ms 61 holder and CAC wont bean it.
@BillJones said:
My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned.
How is JA pulling any strings with regards to a coin you recognize as having been overgraded?
He has nothing to do with it.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@BillJones said:
If I wait long enough, that AU in the MS-61 holder might get a green bean. “Grade-flatiron” has made such items into market acceptable Mint State coins, and CAC has beaned some of them. Remember CAC beans the coins they are willing to buy, and that has included pieces pushed via grade-flatiron.
I'm guessing your au 55 coin in a ms 61 holder will never get CAC approval
@BillJones said:
My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned.
How is JA pulling any strings with regards to a coin you recognize as having been overgraded?
@BillJones said:
My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned.
How is JA pulling any strings with regards to a coin you recognize as having been overgraded?
He has nothing to do with it.
You said this coin was "condemned" by cac
You refuse to buy any coin without a sticker, and you are not alone. So it’s “condemned” so far as you are concerned.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@pmh1nic said:
Ignore the 99% and focus on the 1%. I say focus on the 99% and ignore the 1%. It’s missing the forest because you’re obsessed with one tree.
A "live and let live" guy wouldn't tell somebody else what to focus on, and what to ignore.
@BillJones said:
My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned.
How is JA pulling any strings with regards to a coin you recognize as having been overgraded?
He has nothing to do with it.
You said this coin was "condemned" by cac
You refuse to buy any coin without a sticker, and you are not alone. So it’s “condemned” so far as you are concerned.
At a price I would consider it. But I wouldnt pay ms 61 money for it or au 58 money for it
Comments
Obsessed? Not at all. We’re simply having a discussion about valuations.
You interpret my asking questions as caring (emotional). I don’t “care” on way or another but I’d like to understand the reasoning for why people are willing to pay high premiums for admittedly minor differences.
Again you use the word care as if I’m emotionally involved in the decision. Are they 50 feet from the stage or 500 feet. I might have an opinion about the value of the experience the are buying. I’d be interested in the reasoning.
This was addressed in a number of prior responses. Your money to be spent as you see fit.
We weren’t taking the issue of selling but buying. But that does one reason the premiums have gotten so high, together nd CAC sticker. That was part of my earlier comments.
5 - 7 Bother, bother and offend. All are dealing with an emotional response. You seem to be bothered and offended that I ask about the decision making process when someone pays a high premium for a coin. Why are you so emotionally invested in these questions?
You say "I would like to understand the reasoning" for people paying high premiums. People have explained it to you over and over but you keep arguing it. If you want to just know the rationale than you know it. However you seem to not be able to accept people may have a different opinion than you.
If you say you can learn by viewing 100 examples of a type---sure. If you think you're even in the same league as JA from looking at 100 examplea-well I disagree.
Personally, I think the US market is too big and too mature to be inefficiently priced.
Pcgs has graded 10 $20 1876 in 64 and 64+. Just one in all these years of grading is 65. Let's assume the grades are accurate (no reason to think they are not). If 10 collectors could pay $45,000 for a ms 64 and the 65 came up for sale for a small premium, dont you think many would want the only gem for that date for a small premium? And who would want to pay alot of money for a 64 if a 65 was not much more? Let's say the premium is higher like 3x the the Ms-64, dont you think at least a few would be willing to pay extra to have the only gem? The Ms-65 is unique. Simplistically saying since it is just 1 point higher, it should be just a little bit more ignores so many moving parts. Also, you make light of the fact it is one point higher---botton line is it is better and it is the best By the way, the 64 cost 45,000 but the 63 is 8000. Why not just get the 63 instead of the 64 and 65? It's a never ending slippery slope. Collectors will pay large premiums to have the very best. And certainly in a competitive and highly sought area like $20 Libs. In fact, based upon the above it would be irrational if the sole 1876 ms65 did not sell for a large premium.
Well this is a US coin forum so if you think it is dead.....Odd how you feel the US coin market is dead as we read about new collectors in all aspects of the hobby and seeing record prices. Seems like the better US coins do, the less you seem to enjoy it. Odd.
I’ll challenge that. If you were going to view 100 examples of a particular type, have you done the math and calculated how many of each specific grade that would be? I have and the number could literally be counted on one hand. Among the very few examples of each that you’d be viewing, you wouldn’t have the perspective to know which were low end, mid-range, high end, over-graded or under-graded. And of course, that doesn’t even inclide problem (details-grade) coins - cleaning, altered surfaces, repairs, tooling, artificial toning/color, added mint-marks, counterfeits, altered dates, whizzing, rim filing and so on.
But wait, there’s more, much more. What about different dates and mints in each series? They’re not all produced the same way. There are differences in strike, luster, texture and color, that need to be learned. I could go on and on, but if you don’t already realize how your figure of 100 examples is so ludicrously insufficient, I don’t think you ever will...unless you were to try it yourself.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Mark,
You might recall an earlier discussion over "original luster" where the same forumite argued that a simple reading of the ANACS grading guide allowed him to conclude that PCGS was misapplying the grading standards. So, 100 coins is 100 more than it took to question PCGS standards.
I've looked at thousands of Buffalo nickels, my favorite US series. I still have a lot to learn.
You might also add proof vs specimen vs business strike as something you won't learn in a 100 coin viewing sample.
tell me if my assumption is wrong - a lot of your collection hasn't been to CAC - since you have a good eye, a lot of your collection will probably get beaned at some point in the future
He didn't say it was dead. He said it was dead for "thinking people".
People have NOT explained it to me over and over again. Actually the only one that was close to explaining it was WineSteve. He acknowledged that the difference in the grades are visible, slight but important to him. And that is the critical point I’ve made throughout this thread, why have slight differences driven premiums to extremes. One of the reasons is tag and CAC. Collectors have assign importance to this slight differences and look to CAC to validate those slight differences exist. In my opinion that’s missing the forest for the trees. You’ve got two coins that are 99% the same and the 1% is an extra ding or a very slight difference in luster that drives up the price 5x. That in my opinion is putting far to much emphasis on those slight differences. I could understand a 5x premium jumping from VF-45 to MS-65. These two coins are going to be dramatic difference in detail, luster, wear, contact marks, etc. But from MS-65 to 66? These are essential the same coins with very slight differences.
He still doesn't get that SOME collectors value those differences, and are willing to pay up for it!
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
You falsely assume that a CAC coin is always the best coin. It is not. There are issues where the highest CACed coin is a grade or two below. Is a 66 CAC really superior to a 67 or 68 without a green bean? Definitely not in all cases. Maybe in select cases the lower grade coin is superior, but not all of them.
Comparing all CACed coins to a Mercedes is absurd. There are plenty of pedestrian CAC coins out there. Tobacco juice toned coins and early federal silver with scratches come to mind.
It’s not so much what one person does with his money as the cumulative market distortions that result from group think.
You have taken the position previously that the market is always right. Was it right the crash in 1989-1990 or after?
He doesn't want to get it.
He's not asking, he's pressing his own view that the difference shouldn't matter.
Yes, many collectors will pay huge multiples for coins that are only slightly different/better (or at least ones that they perceive as such). At the same time, numerous other collectors such as yourself, won’t pay the premiums and can’t understand why others do. As has already been posted, it’s about supply and demand and where each buyer chooses to draw the line regarding what amount of premium he’s willing to pay. It’s really not very complicated.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I understand you’re point but a 3x premium for something “unique” still begs the question unique in want way. As far as a 64 to 65 both coins should be very nice examples of the coin in question. Both should have very good eye appeal. The 65 should have a few less marks or slightly better luster or a slightly better strike but essentially (can’t put numbers but let’s say 95% the same) they are the same coin with slight differences. As mentioned in another post, it’s not like we’re going from XF-45 to MS-65 where the coins are dramatically different. So fundamentally in your 64 to 65 example the uniqueness is based on minor differences. And where a 3x or higher premium is involved you now are looking for tpg and/or CAC to valid those minor differences exist. Collectors assigned very high values to minor differences and that created a need for third party validation. The problem isn’t the tag companies or CAC, the problem is collectors.
You forgot MS-65+.
People care more as the grades go up. Think about this, how many grades are there between 45 and 50 vs. 65 and 70?
Both. Conditions change, the market adjusts. Hopefully, it does so more gradually than 1989.
The rise in that period was driven by investment portfolios made possible by 3rd party grading. When the investment groups crashed, hard, the market crashed with them.
Market conditions do change. If investment groups still existed, MS65 Saints might be mid 5 figure coins. Look at the growth in stock market capitalization over the last 30 years and imagine that money chasing a fixed number of investment grade coins.
I understand supply and demand. The question is why the demand? Someone mentioned that the one 66 is unique. The question then becomes unique in what way? The answer is unique in very slight ways which is back to putting a huge amount of emphasis on very minor details. Of course everyone is free to assign value as they choose but understand that when you pay a 3x premium you have assign value (excessive in my opinion) to minor issues. It then becomes critical that a tpg company and/or CAC validates those differences.
You really aren't. A live and let live person wouldn't care why others had different preferences, and wouldn't continue to offer arguments as to why they're wrong.
The PROBLEM isn't collectors. The MARKET is collectors.
Again, you don't agree with the market. Fine. But the REASON for the value difference is easy and obvious to understand. Stop pretending that you are just asking the question. You are arguing a position.
And the fact is, you can call it a "minor" difference if you want, but it is a difference. A difference that even a chimp like me can see and appreciate. A difference that richer chimps than I are willing to pay to acquire.
You could replace the green CAC sticker with the words "monster/rainbow toning" and you would get similar responses. Some people will pay large premiums for that, others just mumble and tell you they will give you 80% of bid. You just have to know your target audience for selling your coins, whether it's the CAC bean, some outrageous attractive toning or just an attractive coin for the grade.
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
Why does a 1916-D Merc dime in AG sell for more than a 1916 dime in UNC? The minor difference favors the 16-D. The major differences favor the 16. But more people (demand) favor the 1916-D.
The market has decided. Accept the decision and profit. Deny the decision and make yourself and everyone else miserable.
It’s not the number so much as what the number represents. To take it to an extreme, if I show an example of a 45 and 65 to my 10 year old grandson and ask him to describe the differences between the coins even his inexperienced eye will pick out quite a few differences. If I show him a 65 and 66 he’ll probably think these are the same coins. If I asked him which would you rather have my guess is he say either one is fine. They’re both great examples of the coin. How do we get from that to paying 5x for one over the other? We have assigned tremendous value to minor issues.
Ok----you dont get demand you say. Tell you what, I will take the ms66 at a small premium and everyone else can take the 65. Problem solved
Wrong, a live and let live person may want to know the reason you make a choice but they don’t stand in the way of your making that choice. If my questions and answer become an obstruction to you the problem isn’t my questions.
People have been giving you a reason and you continue to argue with them over it.
Here is another possible answer to your question why a 64 and 65 be as you say "95%" the same and have such different prices. Maybe you are not as good a grader as you think you are and a better grader sees the coins differently than you. In other words, one is clearly superior. Not trying to be insulting but trying to answer your question.
The market cannot be always be correct and be prone to sharp corrections. Market conditions change but not that rapidly.
Do you read what you write. The problem isn’t collectors but the market is collectors…smh.
Yes, I understand the reasons for the premiums and it should be absolutely clear to anyone that’s been reading my post that I understand why the premiums exist.
It’s not just me calling them minor differences. People paying the premiums call them slight differences. You are the king of strawman arguments. When did I ever say those minor differences don’t exist or couldn’t be identified? You seem to make up arguments in your mind that don’t exist and then assign them to others.
Why do some diamonds, which have very minor differnces, but look the same to unknowledgeable viewers, sell for many multiples of others? Because some buyers can see the differences and are willing to pay for it. And/or because the diamonds have been graded and many buyers rely upon that grading.
Some coin buyers, who pay huge premiums for extremely minor differences in quality and/or eye-appeal, end up getting badly burned. Others do very well. Some collectors are willing to take the risk, while others aren’t. I realize you’re in the latter category and have no problem understanding it. I don’t see why you can’t (or refuse’ to understand that some collectors have a very different mindset from yours.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
They did in 1989. Wasn't there legal action against one of the investment portfolios? Almost overnight, the investment groups vanished which caused supply to surge and demand to dry up.
Are you suggesting that the market is incorrectly priced if a nuclear exchange between the US and China caused a sudden collapse?
And the coin market can hardly be said to be "prone to sharp corrections" when it happened once in 150 years.
This has nothing to do with my ability to grade. I’ll accept the tpg assessment of a 65 and 66 grade. You tell me since you’re so well versed what are the technical differences that define those grades? They will be slight differences in strike, luster, size and location of marks. Feel free to expand.
I did not say what you suggested I said. YOU said that the "problem was collectors". I corrected YOUR sentence because it isn't a "problem" just because YOU call it a problem.
I also NEVER SAID that you said those minor differences don't exist. QUITE THE CONTRARY, I acknowledged that you said "minor differences" exist but pointed out that we can see those minor differences and people value those differences.
Please reread what I wrote more carefully. I will happily accept you apology when it comes.
I'll stick with my answers and the other couple dozen answers people have given you. Enjoy your day.
It might be organic.
The collection might get beaned when it comes time to sell. That will be a discussion between the auction house and me. My position is that I can't collect expensive U.S. coins in the future because I can't tolerate the current market with one man pulling the strings.
I have coins that would never bean. I knew that when I bought a couple of them because they were over graded in the holder. The reason was that they rare coins which fit in wit the rest of my sets. For example I bought a coin in an MS-61 holder that is really only an AU-55 or 58. That will never bean. It's a good coin, but it's condemned. That coin was what my old economics professor called "a consumption act." It's like buying new car, a good bottle of Scotch or a fancy meal at a restaurant. I bought it because I am enjoying it.
The perfect solution to not post in other people's CAC threads is to make your own
We understand that individuals will pay “huge premiums for extremely minor differences”. And because they are paying huge premiums for “extremely minor differences” they require third parties to validate that those differences exist. They then tout the idea that those “extremely minor differences” are to be the focus rather than the 99% of the coin that is the same in the coin that is ranked 1 point lower. Ignore the 99% and focus on the 1%. I say focus on the 99% and ignore the 1%. It’s missing the forest because you’re obsessed with one tree.
So you bought a coin in a Ms-61 holder that really is an au 55 or 58 and wont bean---seems like CAC did exactly what it was suppose to do and protect the next buyer of the coin.
How is JA pulling any strings with regards to a coin you recognize as having been overgraded?
A "live and let live" guy wouldn't tell somebody else what to focus on, and what to ignore.
Just sayin'.
If I wait long enough, that AU in the MS-61 holder might get a green bean. “Grade-flatiron” has made such items into market acceptable Mint State coins, and CAC has beaned some of them. Remember CAC beans the coins they are willing to buy, and that has included pieces pushed via grade-flatiron.
It makes no sense to say that the coin is "condemned" because it is a au 55 coin in a ms 61 holder and CAC wont bean it.
He has nothing to do with it.
I'm guessing your au 55 coin in a ms 61 holder will never get CAC approval
You said this coin was "condemned" by cac
You refuse to buy any coin without a sticker, and you are not alone. So it’s “condemned” so far as you are concerned.
But he's just trying to understand...
At a price I would consider it. But I wouldnt pay ms 61 money for it or au 58 money for it