With coins likes these selling way over recent auctions and then sold again at a loss, it screams new players to me. Could it be There’s an influx of folks to the hobby? 😃
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
I don't think it's necessarily proper to continue to debate this particular coin - it's a great coin - but I disagree with, "Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
Technical grading and eye appeal (market grading) are different. From what I have seen in my experience and heard from John Albanese in his many interviews, CAC requires a coin to meet both the technical grade and have originality. Not all coins that are great coins are going to CAC at the assigned TPG grade - it doesn't make them any less great.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
A foreign substance (sulfur) on the surface of the coin can create that dark spotting - darker than the adjacent toning. That CAN (not must) be evidence of artificial toning.
CAC is very particular. They are not grading a coin based on its market value or even its overall attractiveness. They are certifying that it is exceptional an A or B coin for the grade. I don't care if that coin sold for 100x the price guide, I don't see it as exceptional for a 64 based on the chatter on the coin. And, I don't know, but it is possible that CAC considered the toning to be questionable - which the bidders obviously did not.
Failure to CAC doesn't mean a coin isn't nice. That same coin in a 63 holder might CAC - assuming the toning isn't a problem. Just because it is maxed out in grade at a 64 isn't a condemnation of the coin.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
Eye appeal is not dependent on the technical grade. A coin doesn’t need to be conservatively graded to bring top dollar, especially one like yours that had such attractive toning.
@jmlanzaf said:
Old retired men with significant disposable income are never the economic canary in the coal mine.
Sometimes it's the opposite. They need to simplify their estates.
The opposite? Retired old men with significant disposable income become impoverished before poor young people without disposable income?
They convert their assets to cash. : )
I know. However that's not what I was referring to. You can never judge the economic climate based on either the very rich or the very poor. Retirees with significant disposable income are the last group to tighten their belts.
CAC is very particular. They are not grading a coin based on its market value or even its overall attractiveness. They are certifying that it is exceptional for the grade.
Agree with everything you said in your reply, with one small correction to this statement. For accuracy’s sake, a CAC sticker is not represented/advertised to be “exceptional for the grade”.
You deleted before I hit quote, but not before I read your comment. I would clarify by stating that originality does not always equal eye appeal and that eye appeal is in the eye of the beholder. For instance, some prefer crusty toning and some prefer blast white. I like both, depending on the series.
CAC is very particular. They are not grading a coin based on its market value or even its overall attractiveness. They are certifying that it is exceptional for the grade.
Agree with everything you said in your reply, with one small correction to this statement. For accuracy’s sake, a CAC sticker is not represented/advertised to be “exceptional for the grade”.
Sure, top 60 to 70% of coins in that grade. I suppose "exceptional" might imply a more select group.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
A foreign substance (sulfur) on the surface of the coin can create that dark spotting - darker than the adjacent toning. That CAN (not must) be evidence of artificial toning.
CAC is very particular. They are not grading a coin based on its market value or even its overall attractiveness. They are certifying that it is exceptional for the grade. I don't care if that coin sold for 100x the price guide, I don't see it as exceptional for a 64 based on the chatter on the coin. And, I don't know, but it is possible that CAC considered the toning to be questionable - which the bidders obviously did not.
Failure to CAC doesn't mean a coin isn't nice. That same coin in a 63 holder might CAC - assuming the toning isn't a problem. Just because it is maxed out in grade at a 64 isn't a condemnation of the coin.
We are obviously discussing different things here. You are referring to technical grading, which in this case is largely irrelevant to the coin’s market value.
Out of over 600 PCGS MS64 1885 Morgan’s sold at public auction in the PCGS auction archive (non-PL examples) this coin is in the top five. I think that qualifies as “exceptional “.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
A foreign substance (sulfur) on the surface of the coin can create that dark spotting - darker than the adjacent toning. That CAN (not must) be evidence of artificial toning.
CAC is very particular. They are not grading a coin based on its market value or even its overall attractiveness. They are certifying that it is exceptional for the grade. I don't care if that coin sold for 100x the price guide, I don't see it as exceptional for a 64 based on the chatter on the coin. And, I don't know, but it is possible that CAC considered the toning to be questionable - which the bidders obviously did not.
Failure to CAC doesn't mean a coin isn't nice. That same coin in a 63 holder might CAC - assuming the toning isn't a problem. Just because it is maxed out in grade at a 64 isn't a condemnation of the coin.
We are obviously discussing different things here. You are referring to technical grading, which in this case is largely irrelevant to the coin’s market value.
Out of over 600 PCGS MS64 1885 Morgan’s sold at public auction in the PCGS auction archive (non-PL examples) this coin is in the top five. I think that qualifies as “exceptional “.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
A foreign substance (sulfur) on the surface of the coin can create that dark spotting - darker than the adjacent toning. That CAN (not must) be evidence of artificial toning.
CAC is very particular. They are not grading a coin based on its market value or even its overall attractiveness. They are certifying that it is exceptional for the grade. I don't care if that coin sold for 100x the price guide, I don't see it as exceptional for a 64 based on the chatter on the coin. And, I don't know, but it is possible that CAC considered the toning to be questionable - which the bidders obviously did not.
Failure to CAC doesn't mean a coin isn't nice. That same coin in a 63 holder might CAC - assuming the toning isn't a problem. Just because it is maxed out in grade at a 64 isn't a condemnation of the coin.
We are obviously discussing different things here. You are referring to technical grading, which in this case is largely irrelevant to the coin’s market value.
Out of over 600 PCGS MS64 1885 Morgan’s sold at public auction in the PCGS auction archive (non-PL examples) this coin is in the top five. I think that qualifies as “exceptional “.
But that is NOT what CAC certifies.
I can’t see anyone caring whether, in CAC’s opinion, this coin is a 63 ($93) or a 64 ($135).
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
I liked that one quite a bit (even knowing that it did not sticker, does not change my view). It went for more than I wanted to pay but I'm happy that you got a great result on it!
Thank you for your sentiments, but it was not really a great result. I paid $920 for it in a Heritage auction in 2003, kept it 20 years, and it sold for $1856 with the buyer’s fee.
I think that is still a solid result. You could have picked something else that would have had a better return (like some stocks) but in general, getting almost 2x for many coins is a great return. And your timing was good too. If this coin went to auction in the 2014-2019 era on GC, you would have likely squeezed out a small gain or even lost money.
@JW77 said:
Just because the market has been exuberant and prices in some segments seem irrational, don't assume that it will reverse. Markets can remain irrational for long stretches of time. Also, I don't believe the coming recession (which may or may not happen) will effect the wealthy that play in the higher end of the coin market. The only thing I know for sure is that we don't know!
I believe this to be true as well. There are winners even in a recession and some of the "losers" will still have plenty of funds to spend.
Even in the Great Depression, 75 to 80% of the people stayed employed. Like Vault Box, the pain is not spread evenly.
Here is another one that was surprising....above 66 FBL prices for a 65 green CAC (and yes it is an NGC 3.0 which are gaining a premium but not that much of a premium). Does the buyer figure it to be a 67?
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
A foreign substance (sulfur) on the surface of the coin can create that dark spotting - darker than the adjacent toning. That CAN (not must) be evidence of artificial toning.
CAC is very particular. They are not grading a coin based on its market value or even its overall attractiveness. They are certifying that it is exceptional an A or B coin for the grade. I don't care if that coin sold for 100x the price guide, I don't see it as exceptional for a 64 based on the chatter on the coin. And, I don't know, but it is possible that CAC considered the toning to be questionable - which the bidders obviously did not.
Failure to CAC doesn't mean a coin isn't nice. That same coin in a 63 holder might CAC - assuming the toning isn't a problem. Just because it is maxed out in grade at a 64 isn't a condemnation of the coin.
Edited to downplay "exceptional"
I think Luster is underrated by coin buyers. I think exceptional luster could lift a coins grade as well as inferior luster should possibly downgrade a coins grade.
I rate luster equally as important as contact marks with strike being the third and least important of the 3 components of technical grading on the scale. Unless the strike is below average and affects the appearance of the coin adversely.
@U1chicago said:
Here is another one that was surprising....above 66 FBL prices for a 65 green CAC (and yes it is an NGC 3.0 which are gaining a premium but not that much of a premium). Does the buyer figure it to be a 67?
The coin has the look. Blazing original luster with light attractive gold toning. Beautiful but not worth that much premium in my opinion
I was the underbidder on a nice '38-d MS65 PL a couple years ago for I believe a couple of years ago. Pop 1 coin to boot. As far as I can recall, it hammered for 5K which appears to have been a bargain. I sure wish I would have stepped up my game at least one more bid-20/20 hindsight like us all!
@Catbert said:
I was attempting to win a seated half AU58 CAC and it went 3X CAC price guide. Certainly it was attractive and worthy of a premium but I was surprised by the end result.
Are CAC and PCGS price guides the same for this coin in this grade as it seems?
The coin below has a PCGS Price Guide price of $1000.
@LJenkins11 said:
I'm guessing this is the coin? That does look pretty sweet. As for the $2925 final price wow! I have been guilty of spending MS money on certain XF and AU examples of this series in the past, congrats to whoever won it.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
CAC doesn’t require that a coin be exceptional for the grade, but rather, solid or better.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
CAC doesn’t require that a coin be exceptional for the grade, but rather, solid or better.
@rays said:
Each coin is unique. I recently sold this 1885 Morgan dollar, on GC, for 14X the PCGS price guide. It has exceptional toning.
I bought this coin before CAC began operations. Just before the auction, the coin was submitted to CAC by GC on my behalf, and they denied their approval. One of the reasons I don’t place much credence on their little sticker.
")
To me, looks like PCGS bumped that coin to 64 because of the eye appeal due to the toning. However, grade looks like a technical 63 and I’m not surprised it didn’t CAC. Doesn’t really matter regardless, you realized an extremely strong price!
I'm not surprised it didn't CAC either. It has a fair amount of chatter and that dark spot in the hair could be viewed as questionable. It's nice, but nice isn't the same as exceptional for the grade.
CAC doesn’t require that a coin be exceptional for the grade, but rather, solid or better.
Yes, bit of sloppy parlance on my part.
Since I like the word "parlance", you're excused.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@LJenkins11 said:
I'm guessing this is the coin? That does look pretty sweet. As for the $2925 final price wow! I have been guilty of spending MS money on certain XF and AU examples of this series in the past, congrats to whoever won it.
Wow, I don't even really like this coin for the grade. Looks like a weak strike, and secondary toning that redeveloped after an old-time dip stripped it bright white. I'd very much prefer one with original, gray dirt.
Time to update the old adage, "buy the coin, not the plastic." In 2023, buy the coin, not the sticker?
@Zcoins I think you know the answer to your question. "So we’re good to grade with images from both sides?"
Hopefully we can agree that one can certainly evaluate a coin more accurately by seeing both sides rather than just one side. I've been told by many professional graders that they are unable to accurately grade coins from images.
The reality is that many times we are unable to view coins in hand. One can glean much useful information about a coin from images.
Though I will never understand the amazingly high prices paid for colorful tarnish, I will say, that if I were a coin dealer, tarnish would be a focus of my business. The premiums are incredible. Cheers, RickO
JMO. For me it’s time to just sit back and wait until the market correction. If this is the trend going forward I won’t be adding any CAC anytime soon.
W.C.Fields "I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
I'd hoped this thread would be related to commentary regarding the current market as evidenced by auction results. Those who wish to debate the merits of CAC or a particular coin's grade, I gently suggest they start their own thread.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@shish said: @Zcoins I think you know the answer to your question. "So we’re good to grade with images from both sides?"
Hopefully we can agree that one can certainly evaluate a coin more accurately by seeing both sides rather than just one side. I've been told by many professional graders that they are unable to accurately grade coins from images.
The reality is that many times we are unable to view coins in hand. One can glean much useful information about a coin from images.
Agree. It's can be difficult to grade a coin from photos, one or several.
@Catbert said:
I'd hoped this thread would be related to commentary regarding the current market as evidenced by auction results. Those who wish to debate the merits of CAC or a particular coin's grade, I gently suggest they start their own thread.
I've heard the market it doing well, but from dealers and on other forum threads such as this one:
Yes it’s a sellers market. If it’s really nice for the grade auction bidding competition will be really tough. When the market turns around (economic factors) some of that will dissipate. I don’t doubt there is new money bidding stuff up but when they fall to Earth (bear market) that will evaporate like morning dew.
@Catbert said:
I was attempting to win a seated half AU58 CAC and it went 3X CAC price guide. Certainly it was attractive and worthy of a premium but I was surprised by the end result. Viewing Instagram this morning, I saw a post from @U1chicago (u1toning there) of a common date MS64 nicely toned Morgan going for 7K.
While these two pieces had attractive toning and perhaps not indicative of a trend using just 2 examples, I'm just amazed that the coin market appears so exuberant given the general economic nervousness so often noted in the news.
What say you?
I gave you two examples of attractively toned coins that I personally sold recently via public auction on GC for many multiples of the PCGS price guide. I think this qualifies as:
(I'd hoped this thread would be) "related to commentary regarding the current market as evidenced by auction results."
Yes I have been outbid a lot online, eBay / GC these days. Most likely bidding against well off people putting in nuke bids. Not my game.
As dealer I usually bid, offer 75 pct MV (around CDN bid) basis could be CPG, Coin Facts, NN, or what plan price at, etc. If that doesn’t fly just pass. I might take a counter offer (show) if it’s reasonable, really something outstanding, badly needed. Not set in concrete. Now items over 1000 MV / offer more narrow spread.
But not to worry:
Many times I will find a decent deal off the bourse (show) or eBay seller in that range or close enough motivate me to purchase. One simply has to shop around.
@Catbert said:
I was attempting to win a seated half AU58 CAC and it went 3X CAC price guide. Certainly it was attractive and worthy of a premium but I was surprised by the end result. Viewing Instagram this morning, I saw a post from @U1chicago (u1toning there) of a common date MS64 nicely toned Morgan going for 7K.
While these two pieces had attractive toning and perhaps not indicative of a trend using just 2 examples, I'm just amazed that the coin market appears so exuberant given the general economic nervousness so often noted in the news.
What say you?
I gave you two examples of attractively toned coins that I personally sold recently via public auction on GC for many multiples of the PCGS price guide. I think this qualifies as:
(I'd hoped this thread would be) "related to commentary regarding the current market as evidenced by auction results."
Chill please. My comment wasn’t directed at you.
Edit to add: thank you for your comments.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
As others have noted, my observations are that properly graded eye appealing coins continue to bring strong prices at auction, and in private offerings. Especially in my area of interest (CAC Gold), I see no signs of softening in this market.
Anyone who "predicts" that the market is going to slow down is always going to be right, eventually. The question is, when? Technically, we've already been in a recession since the summer of last year. Is it typical for the rare coin market to be so robust when almost all other asset classes are underperforming?
I find the current market for Seated coins to be robust. Having said that there is an old adage that says "anything that can go up can also go down." But then what is life without a little risk.
I now apologize to Catbert for going off topic, but lately I see endless people complaining about buying coins via photos. As I said on another site, "Seeing is way better than NOT seeing."
Try to use your imagination and picture this. 40 years ago there were no pictures. Most people waited for their new Coin World and then scoured it for whatever coins they wanted.
For this discussion we will say a high circ. grade Barber Half. you find a date and grade combo you want but the only description you have to go on is, "Natural Tone".
50% of the time if you called for more information you would be told, "All coins are kept in a bank vault and NO nobody is going to go get a coin to describe it." you have three seconds to buy it before the line goes dead.
25% of the time you would be told, "If you don't know what natural tone means you have no business buying coins." CLICK.
20% of the time you might get a few details but the clock is ticking and the person will say, "I haven't got all day to play 20 questions." You have 3 seconds before the CLICK.
5% of the time you might get a J.H Cline or a Liz at J.J. Teaparty who would take the time to talk to you; but not this time.
You buy the coin and patiently wait for it. The coin arrives and you find this piece of metal with AU details but it has obviously been scoured with a Brillo pad, and I guess you could call the ugly black splotches all over it the natural result of said cleaning.
you call to complain and are told "ALL their coins go through a tremendous review, so what you are claiming is impossible. Obviously YOU are some kind of crook who is trying to substitute a different coin." CLICK.
Now as you stand there holding your phone, what would you have given for a photo?
@seatedlib3991 said:
I find the current market for Seated coins to be robust. Having said that there is an old adage that says "anything that can go up can also go down." But then what is life without a little risk.
I now apologize to Catbert for going off topic, but lately I see endless people complaining about buying coins via photos. As I said on another site, "Seeing is way better than NOT seeing."
Try to use your imagination and picture this. 40 years ago there were no pictures. Most people waited for their new Coin World and then scoured it for whatever coins they wanted.
For this discussion we will say a high circ. grade Barber Half. you find a date and grade combo you want but the only description you have to go on is, "Natural Tone".
50% of the time if you called for more information you would be told, "All coins are kept in a bank vault and NO nobody is going to go get a coin to describe it." you have three seconds to buy it before the line goes dead.
25% of the time you would be told, "If you don't know what natural tone means you have no business buying coins." CLICK.
20% of the time you might get a few details but the clock is ticking and the person will say, "I haven't got all day to play 20 questions." You have 3 seconds before the CLICK.
5% of the time you might get a J.H Cline or a Liz at J.J. Teaparty who would take the time to talk to you; but not this time.
You buy the coin and patiently wait for it. The coin arrives and you find this piece of metal with AU details but it has obviously been scoured with a Brillo pad, and I guess you could call the ugly black splotches all over it the natural result of said cleaning.
you call to complain and are told "ALL their coins go through a tremendous review, so what you are claiming is impossible. Obviously YOU are some kind of crook who is trying to substitute a different coin." CLICK.
Now as you stand there holding your phone, what would you have given for a photo?
Interesting commentary. Where you really need to see a coin in-hand is for AU and mint state examples, as luster is very difficult to capture accurately in a photo.
@Catbert said:
I was attempting to win a seated half AU58 CAC and it went 3X CAC price guide. Certainly it was attractive and worthy of a premium but I was surprised by the end result. Viewing Instagram this morning, I saw a post from @U1chicago (u1toning there) of a common date MS64 nicely toned Morgan going for 7K.
While these two pieces had attractive toning and perhaps not indicative of a trend using just 2 examples, I'm just amazed that the coin market appears so exuberant given the general economic nervousness so often noted in the news.
What say you?
Happens all of the time. Just remember, very few coins are truly rare. Be patient, pay attention, and you'll find another one soon enough. I had given up on finding a number of nice type coins, and years later, I've usually found them. Often at a show, or though a contact, not at an auction.
I can count on one hand the truly rare coins that spoke to me (one of them I could actually afford). You know them when you see them. For these, I'll ask, "how much do you want for it?" I've been collecting 50 years plus.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
@U1chicago said:
Here is another one that was surprising....above 66 FBL prices for a 65 green CAC (and yes it is an NGC 3.0 which are gaining a premium but not that much of a premium). Does the buyer figure it to be a 67?
I placed an early bid on that coin but it went far beyond what I thought it was worth. It looks exceptional from the photos and based on my experience buying from GC I’m sure it’s at least twice as nice in hand.
I’m sure the final bid amount was a combination of the coin being nice for the date and grade, the CAC sticker and the “older” NGC holder.
Put that same coin in the newest generation holder at either PCGS or NGC in the same grade with green CAC and I don’t see it going past the $75-85 range.
Comments
With coins likes these selling way over recent auctions and then sold again at a loss, it screams new players to me. Could it be There’s an influx of folks to the hobby? 😃
BHNC #248 … 130 and counting.
That coin has no questionable dark hair spot. Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
I don't think it's necessarily proper to continue to debate this particular coin - it's a great coin - but I disagree with, "Any coin that brings 14X the PCGS price guide at auction, I think would qualify as “exceptional for the grade”.
Technical grading and eye appeal (market grading) are different. From what I have seen in my experience and heard from John Albanese in his many interviews, CAC requires a coin to meet both the technical grade and have originality. Not all coins that are great coins are going to CAC at the assigned TPG grade - it doesn't make them any less great.
A foreign substance (sulfur) on the surface of the coin can create that dark spotting - darker than the adjacent toning. That CAN (not must) be evidence of artificial toning.
CAC is very particular. They are not grading a coin based on its market value or even its overall attractiveness. They are certifying that it is exceptional an A or B coin for the grade. I don't care if that coin sold for 100x the price guide, I don't see it as exceptional for a 64 based on the chatter on the coin. And, I don't know, but it is possible that CAC considered the toning to be questionable - which the bidders obviously did not.
Failure to CAC doesn't mean a coin isn't nice. That same coin in a 63 holder might CAC - assuming the toning isn't a problem. Just because it is maxed out in grade at a 64 isn't a condemnation of the coin.
Edited to downplay "exceptional"
Eye appeal is not dependent on the technical grade. A coin doesn’t need to be conservatively graded to bring top dollar, especially one like yours that had such attractive toning.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Delete. Decided to keep my mouth shut for a change.
Ugly is in the eye of the beholder
They convert their assets to cash. : )
I know. However that's not what I was referring to. You can never judge the economic climate based on either the very rich or the very poor. Retirees with significant disposable income are the last group to tighten their belts.
Agree with everything you said in your reply, with one small correction to this statement. For accuracy’s sake, a CAC sticker is not represented/advertised to be “exceptional for the grade”.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
You deleted before I hit quote, but not before I read your comment. I would clarify by stating that originality does not always equal eye appeal and that eye appeal is in the eye of the beholder. For instance, some prefer crusty toning and some prefer blast white. I like both, depending on the series.
Sure, top 60 to 70% of coins in that grade. I suppose "exceptional" might imply a more select group.
We are obviously discussing different things here. You are referring to technical grading, which in this case is largely irrelevant to the coin’s market value.
Out of over 600 PCGS MS64 1885 Morgan’s sold at public auction in the PCGS auction archive (non-PL examples) this coin is in the top five. I think that qualifies as “exceptional “.
Not unexceptional, perhaps?
But that is NOT what CAC certifies.
I can’t see anyone caring whether, in CAC’s opinion, this coin is a 63 ($93) or a 64 ($135).
I think that is still a solid result. You could have picked something else that would have had a better return (like some stocks) but in general, getting almost 2x for many coins is a great return. And your timing was good too. If this coin went to auction in the 2014-2019 era on GC, you would have likely squeezed out a small gain or even lost money.
No need to resist; I appreciated the comparison.
Here is another one that was surprising....above 66 FBL prices for a 65 green CAC (and yes it is an NGC 3.0 which are gaining a premium but not that much of a premium). Does the buyer figure it to be a 67?
Here’s another coin I recently sold on GC for over 6X PCGS price guide:
https://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/1271770/1953-S-Franklin-Half-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-CAC-Toned
It is not artificially toned.
I think Luster is underrated by coin buyers. I think exceptional luster could lift a coins grade as well as inferior luster should possibly downgrade a coins grade.
I rate luster equally as important as contact marks with strike being the third and least important of the 3 components of technical grading on the scale. Unless the strike is below average and affects the appearance of the coin adversely.
The coin has the look. Blazing original luster with light attractive gold toning. Beautiful but not worth that much premium in my opinion
I was the underbidder on a nice '38-d MS65 PL a couple years ago for I believe a couple of years ago. Pop 1 coin to boot. As far as I can recall, it hammered for 5K which appears to have been a bargain. I sure wish I would have stepped up my game at least one more bid-20/20 hindsight like us all!
Are CAC and PCGS price guides the same for this coin in this grade as it seems?
The coin below has a PCGS Price Guide price of $1000.
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/83056239
Just a reminder, no one can accurately grade a coin from an image of just one side.
So we’re good to grade with images from both sides?
CAC doesn’t require that a coin be exceptional for the grade, but rather, solid or better.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Yes, bit of sloppy parlance on my part.
Since I like the word "parlance", you're excused.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Wow, I don't even really like this coin for the grade. Looks like a weak strike, and secondary toning that redeveloped after an old-time dip stripped it bright white. I'd very much prefer one with original, gray dirt.
Time to update the old adage, "buy the coin, not the plastic." In 2023, buy the coin, not the sticker?
@Zcoins I think you know the answer to your question. "So we’re good to grade with images from both sides?"
Hopefully we can agree that one can certainly evaluate a coin more accurately by seeing both sides rather than just one side. I've been told by many professional graders that they are unable to accurately grade coins from images.
The reality is that many times we are unable to view coins in hand. One can glean much useful information about a coin from images.
Though I will never understand the amazingly high prices paid for colorful tarnish, I will say, that if I were a coin dealer, tarnish would be a focus of my business. The premiums are incredible. Cheers, RickO
JMO. For me it’s time to just sit back and wait until the market correction. If this is the trend going forward I won’t be adding any CAC anytime soon.
"I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
Absorbable observations—thanks for your bits.
I'd hoped this thread would be related to commentary regarding the current market as evidenced by auction results. Those who wish to debate the merits of CAC or a particular coin's grade, I gently suggest they start their own thread.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Agree. It's can be difficult to grade a coin from photos, one or several.
I've heard the market it doing well, but from dealers and on other forum threads such as this one:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1088657/state-of-the-rare-coin-market
Yes it’s a sellers market. If it’s really nice for the grade auction bidding competition will be really tough. When the market turns around (economic factors) some of that will dissipate. I don’t doubt there is new money bidding stuff up but when they fall to Earth (bear market) that will evaporate like morning dew.
I gave you two examples of attractively toned coins that I personally sold recently via public auction on GC for many multiples of the PCGS price guide. I think this qualifies as:
(I'd hoped this thread would be) "related to commentary regarding the current market as evidenced by auction results."
Yes I have been outbid a lot online, eBay / GC these days. Most likely bidding against well off people putting in nuke bids. Not my game.
As dealer I usually bid, offer 75 pct MV (around CDN bid) basis could be CPG, Coin Facts, NN, or what plan price at, etc. If that doesn’t fly just pass. I might take a counter offer (show) if it’s reasonable, really something outstanding, badly needed. Not set in concrete. Now items over 1000 MV / offer more narrow spread.
But not to worry:
Many times I will find a decent deal off the bourse (show) or eBay seller in that range or close enough motivate me to purchase. One simply has to shop around.
Chill please. My comment wasn’t directed at you.
Edit to add: thank you for your comments.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
As others have noted, my observations are that properly graded eye appealing coins continue to bring strong prices at auction, and in private offerings. Especially in my area of interest (CAC Gold), I see no signs of softening in this market.
Anyone who "predicts" that the market is going to slow down is always going to be right, eventually. The question is, when? Technically, we've already been in a recession since the summer of last year. Is it typical for the rare coin market to be so robust when almost all other asset classes are underperforming?
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I find the current market for Seated coins to be robust. Having said that there is an old adage that says "anything that can go up can also go down." But then what is life without a little risk.
I now apologize to Catbert for going off topic, but lately I see endless people complaining about buying coins via photos. As I said on another site, "Seeing is way better than NOT seeing."
Try to use your imagination and picture this. 40 years ago there were no pictures. Most people waited for their new Coin World and then scoured it for whatever coins they wanted.
For this discussion we will say a high circ. grade Barber Half. you find a date and grade combo you want but the only description you have to go on is, "Natural Tone".
50% of the time if you called for more information you would be told, "All coins are kept in a bank vault and NO nobody is going to go get a coin to describe it." you have three seconds to buy it before the line goes dead.
25% of the time you would be told, "If you don't know what natural tone means you have no business buying coins." CLICK.
20% of the time you might get a few details but the clock is ticking and the person will say, "I haven't got all day to play 20 questions." You have 3 seconds before the CLICK.
5% of the time you might get a J.H Cline or a Liz at J.J. Teaparty who would take the time to talk to you; but not this time.
You buy the coin and patiently wait for it. The coin arrives and you find this piece of metal with AU details but it has obviously been scoured with a Brillo pad, and I guess you could call the ugly black splotches all over it the natural result of said cleaning.
you call to complain and are told "ALL their coins go through a tremendous review, so what you are claiming is impossible. Obviously YOU are some kind of crook who is trying to substitute a different coin." CLICK.
Now as you stand there holding your phone, what would you have given for a photo?
Interesting commentary. Where you really need to see a coin in-hand is for AU and mint state examples, as luster is very difficult to capture accurately in a photo.
Happens all of the time. Just remember, very few coins are truly rare. Be patient, pay attention, and you'll find another one soon enough. I had given up on finding a number of nice type coins, and years later, I've usually found them. Often at a show, or though a contact, not at an auction.
I can count on one hand the truly rare coins that spoke to me (one of them I could actually afford). You know them when you see them. For these, I'll ask, "how much do you want for it?" I've been collecting 50 years plus.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
I placed an early bid on that coin but it went far beyond what I thought it was worth. It looks exceptional from the photos and based on my experience buying from GC I’m sure it’s at least twice as nice in hand.
I’m sure the final bid amount was a combination of the coin being nice for the date and grade, the CAC sticker and the “older” NGC holder.
Put that same coin in the newest generation holder at either PCGS or NGC in the same grade with green CAC and I don’t see it going past the $75-85 range.