Options
How come WORTH is not taken into consideration when rating a set ?
STEWARTBLAYNUMIS
Posts: 2,697 ✭✭✭✭
I find it hard to believe that PCGS does not take into consideration the WORTH of coins when ranking a collection. After all this is a major factor when collecting set registry quality coins.
In the mint state Indian category the Gibbs collection at #6 has a value of approximately $15,000 to $18,000.Ted's collection at # 8 has a value of more than $150,000.This is not an anomoly.It is all ovor the place.
Let's hear what everyone thinks.......Do you think value should be a factor when determining set rating ?
0
Comments
The issue of the flaws with the registry and weighting has been discussed many times. Most agree that it is broken, but many others think just using grades is sufficient.
BUT, in the interm money is not the biggest factor rather the weighted GPA is.
#6 Gibbs, lacks 1 BIG coin (1877)
#8 Teds, lacks 5 coins including the 1877.
If Teds collection stays on pace in the end it will prevail over Gibbs set.
Provided the sets are correctly evaluated and the weights are properly assigned to each individual coin I think this system PCGS has developed works quite well.
The worth of the coins is factored in as best can be. The harder issues generally cost more the higher the grade. The differeance in price between a 65 & 66 can be thousands of dollars. The harder the issue the heavier it is weighted. Thus, the big money that can afford the higher grades benefit from the heavier weights assigned.
I really do not think Gibbs would tell you his set is better than Ted's. His is only ranked higher right now due to it being more complete and the weight system. BIG DEAL! Regardless of how PCGS ranks the sets there will always be people who disagree. Its a no win situation for them. If I go out and find the 1861 & 1899 MS68 indians and pay 1,000,000 (just guessing I have no clue what they would cost) for them should my 2 coin set be the number one set?
Don't worry the one with the most money always wins.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Stewart,
This was my problem with set weighings in the first place. You can't rank a coin just based on the date! Everyone agrees the 21 P Morgan is basically the easiest date in 64, but it is tougher then other common dates in 65, and much more so in 66, and especially in 67(I don't think there are any!). A Morgan set with an MS66 21P (worth about $600++) will get no more credit then a set with an 81-S MS66 worth about $200.
What PCGS would have to do is to weight each date/mintmark and grade combination, and personally I don't think that would be very easy to do. Using the value of the coins would probably be easier.
JJacks
My "Market Weighting" idea in a nutshell was to base set ranking on market value as determined by the PCGS price guide. You simply add up the market value of each coin in the set, and that's your ranking.
Why have all this crazy (and inaccurate) weighting for various dates, grades, and designations when we already have a system that rolls all those complex and intangible factors into one nice number -- market value!
And philosophically, no weighting should take precedence over the one voted on by collectors with their money.
The chief criticism of the idea is that the price guide is not accurate enough for this. But I view that as an opportunity, not a problem. If we based the registry on that price guide, suddenly we'd have a bunch of registry watchdogs very interested in keeping the price guide up to date and honest.
That could be a huge side benefit to all collectors, not just registry collectors -- an unprecedented opportunity to create the coin world's first truly comprehensive and timely price guide.
Here's one old thread debating the subject. There were many others. And in each, my opponents' arguments were crushed under the overwhelming logical weight of my proposal.
Alas, elegance and simplicity still didn't win the day. Perhaps you can pick up the torch.
You are right only if the poor guys set only contains the 81-S MS66 and the rich guys set only contains the 21-p MS66.
But what happens when the rich guy adds a 81-S MS67 and the poor guy can only afford to add a 21-P MS64?
Like I said the money will always prevail.
Enjoy the journey and don't sweat the small stuff, in the end your money will prevail and you will be able to bask in the glory.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
To all board members responding
I am waiting to hear from the experts at pcgs whether or not Worth should be a factor in the weighting. Yes or no, its up to them how to do it.
ww billman I disagree with you that in the end, the one with the most money wins because
a) sometimes some coins are just not for sale
b) what about time ?.......savvy ? ....your eye ?......and the most important is your numismatic knowledge
c) what about the slogan "the more money, the bigger the sucker"
By adding worth, I am just trying to close some loopholes
The more I think about it ," The Showdown" is a great idea
In the Gibbs collection vs the Ted collection:
ted's 1872 is worth more than Gibbs entire collection
teds 1869,1882 and 1909 s on their own could be worth more than Gibbs collection in its entirety
Stewart
Regardless of how it's done, someone will always find fault.
To make it simple.... PCGS set rating is a "curve" of:
1- Set Completion
2- Weighting (price or worth)
If Teds collection stays on pace in the end it will prevail over Gibbs set. That is correct!
BLAY what you are asking is for a system like NGC Registry. All market pricing..... NO set completion factors.
The problem with that system is a couple of "high value" coins will out rank a whole set. The whole "One Coin Wonder (Sets)" that caused NGC to make some changes to there Registry.
Both systems have flaws..... both do not work right until the "collections" hits 100% complete! Then and only then do the systems work pretty well.
In God We Trust.... all others pay in Gold and Silver!
Most Registry Set owners know which set is worth more money. If they do not know this they are very naive or just very bias to thier own set. As stated before when the sets are complete the Better set will win out. Untill then some lower sets will win which in this instance includes mine.
Sets based on Money go to NGC. Collector friendly sets go to PCGS.
Both Registries were set up for PCGS and NGC to show off thier product and for collectors to have some Fun and show off thier coins. IMO the Registries were not set up just to show off how much Money a set is worth but apparently this is what it is coming too.
In God We Trust.... all others pay in Gold and Silver!
Some prices on thinly traded coins will of course have to be estimates, but at least everybody can clearly see what that estimate is, and agree or disagree with it.
In contrast, it's difficult to have meaningful debate about some obscure weighting formulae because the effects of changing the various factors are not easily predictable.
SB, by the way, I proposed the idea to David Hall directly and was (very politely of course) told to stuff it.
--------
One last general thing... Market Weighting was not my first choice. All the ranking systems, in the end, are based on the PCGS labels. And assuming a higher-numbered label is necessarily better than another coin is of course a generalization at best.
So my first vote was to leave it alone -- unweighted -- in recognition that it's just a game, so keep the rules simple.
It is interesting to note that in the unweighted days, nobody was able to point to an example where sets were grossly incorrectly ranked following those simple rules! We've added complexity and gained nothing.
But, sometimes humans (and probably collectors in general, with our focus on details) shun simplicity for no good reason.
I guess there's no explaining human nature -- like, for example, why have I wasted so much time on this trivial (in the grand scheme of things) issue??
I didn't like that one coin "sets" could be the #1 "collection" over in the NGC system. A majority complained and NGC says they tweaked their secret formula a little.
So now we can choose which system we like better and play in that sandbox. The thing I like least about the NGC system is it is private. Sure I can guess which coin is more expensive, but when talking top pop coins one can never be sure what value was used by NGC. So I won't play to be #1 there because I never know exactly what adding one upgrade will do for my ranking, I don't even know if certain purchases would even be an upgrade in the first place.
You have hit it right on the head. In the Classic c Coin series this is the problem of rateing sets by a sheet that is a estimate at best. Modern Coins is a different story and should have different rules than the Classics.
Just a opinion and do not want to start another Modern vs Classic War.
There are more NGC sets now than ever before. It is clear that to be #1 you will need mostly all Ultra Cams. So I guess if I were serious I'd know what to buy -- only highest grade NGC Ultra Cameo proofs.
Regards,
Frank
Come on......money can find and draw out coins. We all know that. Yes you are right when it comes to the ultra high grade pop 1 coins, but the guy with the most money will always be able to get the closest to it. Yes it is a lot of work and very time consuming and your set is a testament to that. Your set is #1, the Ally set is #2 and I would bet your set has a higher value than the Ally set.
That market weighting is a very bad idea.
Like I said, the worth of the coins is factored in as best can be. The harder issues generally cost more in the higher grades. The differeance in price between a 65 & 66 can be thousands of dollars. The harder the issue the heavier it is weighted. Thus, the big money that can afford the higher grades benefit from the heavier weights assigned.
Collectors have so much patience assembling their sets but none when it comes to getting patted on the back. Ego's are a hell of a thing.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
ww Billman
Come on......money can draw out coins
This is the primary reason I have not sold my Lincolns !!!! This is the reason I also hide them. Has Bill Gates started collecting Lincoln cents ?
For "The Showdown",I believe I have been collecting mint state Indian cents longer than Joshua.ww billman - Are you taking bets that my set has a value higher than the Ally Set ? What about the Richard set
I truly believe that this Showdown may be a once in a lifetime opportunity to see this many fantastic Indian cents in one place
I would like to see if someone could put together a set of Indians all in AU.And I bet it would cost more than anyone thinks!!!
Worth IS taken into consideration for the PCGS set registry.BJ just told me.However it does not become aparrent until the set is virtually complete
Stewart
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i>Worth IS taken into consideration for the PCGS set registry.BJ just told me.However it does not become aparrent until the set is virtually complete >>
Is that not what I was saying all along?
And yes as I stated in the other thread I love the Idea of the showdown. I really hope PCGS expands it into the other series for future shows.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
I do believe that the thoughts about adding increasing the weighting factor of fair market value is only going to make the registry set collecting more complicated and less enjoyable.
I thought the whole idea of registry collecting was just to create a venue to display your coins and to see your name on a list and to reward you for your efforts towards completing a set.
If I wanted such complexity in collecting such sets then all I have to do is go back to work in my spare time instead of enjoying the coin collecting hobby.
PCGS could easily burn this registry set craze out by over doing it.
STEWARTBLAYNUMIS: Believe me, the collectors who really know their coins will appreciate your set for it really is and also Ally's set for it really is as well, regardless of ranking.
If you had one PCGS MS-67 red (you wish!!) 1872 cent and everything else was a MS-61 black cent while Ally had all MS-65 and better red cents, I would spend equal time between the two sets and spend as much time gawking at the 1872 cent!!!!!! But that does not mean others would do the same.
Our concept of what we like as collectors is not so precise that we cannot quantify it even near perfectly. Our tastes are too varied.
We must keep this registry thing as simple as possible.
PCGS THE ONLY WAY TO GO
Ed
<< <i>The best and most simple way is to let the coin and grade speak for itself no weights or any other gimmicks just the plain old COIN AND THE GRADE
This way a high grade common date is equal to a high grade rare date. Seems right to me....not.
A one on one is not a fair comparison. A complete set would a better comparison where a high grade rarity in say MS67 was in a set and the same average grade coin in MS65 or MS66 in another set the High Grade Rarity is automatically worth 1 or 2 more total points. Right now I have the Current Finest 1965 thru 1998 Clad Washington Set and the 1969-P 1970-P 1971-P 1973-P 1977-D and 1979-D are the only coins weighted in the set. In MS67 the POP is 2,6,2,3,8,9 respectively why should these 6 coins have a value equal to 14 MS67 coins? It makes no sense as there are other years in the set that an MS66 is the highest graded coin for that year and some years that have a POP of 1,2,or 3 in MS67. I just dont believe there is a fair way to weight coins in any set other than someone's opinion.
PCGS THE ONLY WAY TO GO
Ed
It does work out that sets that contain no designations (FBL, FS, FB, FH, DMPL, CAM, DCAM, RD) will have the higher valued sets rise to the top, when they near completion. There will always be arguments about hightest value set, as long as sets allow mixing of designations.
I don't see simple solutions. There will not be many completed sets with the tougher designations. If you allow mixing of designations, the collectors should decide the ranking of each coin within the series (considering grade and designation). This might be a painful solution, but it would take a few evenings for those sets that allow designations.
perfectstrike
IMHO, price encompases all of the factors of a coin's registry position, and should not be ignored.
On the otherhand, most serious collectors collect coins by series. If you like "one coin wonder" sets, stick to the type sets. The Indian Head Set is a "series" set, and shouldn't be plagued by one hit wonders (in theory).
If it is a "series" set, completion is very important aspect that should carry the most weight. Within the set, completion should be augmented by Price to determine the finest set of the "series."
Stewart, you wait until you have the finest set to post it on the Registry. That is probably because you don't consider it the "finest set" until it actually is. Likewise, a "one hit wonder" set is not a "finest set." Maybe this could be solved with a series completion minimum. I know this has been debated, but it has never been resolved.
That's not to knock the #1 set which clearly has been put together lovingly and with great difficulty over much time. But it's simply to speak the obvious. The Registry set values the 1917 Type 1 -- a common date -- the same as the 1916, a scarcity. It values the 1930 full head equally with the 1927-S full head. And it places no value on the most interesting coin in the series, the famous overdate.
It's silly, and it's easy to verify as sillyness because just about anybody would swap the so-called #1 set for those four coins. Heck those four coins in the condition stated -- would probably get the bottom ranking in the Standing Liberties. But it's probably worth twice as much as the entire #1 set.
You see the same thing in Mercury Dimes, Liberty Head Nickels, Buffalo Nickels, Lincoln Pennies, etc., etc., and so forth. The Lincoln pennies Registry Set, for example, doesn't include three of the most interesting, most sought after, and valuable coins in the collection ...the 1922 NO D, and the famous 1917 and '55 double dies. Gosh, you can have a darned good set of Lincoln pennies set without those three gems, but can you call it #1? Heck no!
By the way, I'm sort of new to chime in but I've been reading your messages for a while with much interest.
Opinionated in Thailand
Of course, this topic has been debated, even argued, for a couple years now. The primary flaw with the PCGS system is its failure to reward condition-rarity. Take the example I have mentioned many times over the years with respect to the silver Wash quarter series. Take a coin like the 1932(d) quarter in XF-45 grade that has a ranking of "10". That coin gets 450 points (45 x 10) for the owner in the Registry game. Now, take nearly any of the PCGS-MS68 silver quarters (most of which are pictured on my site right now) - some of the most beautiful and highly sought after Wash quarters out there. Most of these coins have a ranking of "1" or "2" and so to those owners, they get roughly 68 or 136 points for owning one of these great collectibles. Now, how in the world is a $100 XF-45 1932(d) Wash quarter worth 3x-6x a "five figure" coin? It is in the PCGS Registry.
Conclusion: I gave up long ago caring about how many points a coin will be worth in the Registry. My one and only Registry set was registered in the 1999 Registry edition and I truly don't expect to ever Register another set again. I will not pass on MS68 quarters because they only get "68 points", nor will I corner the market on XF-45 1932(d) quarters because they are "so valuable" in the Registry game. I'll buy and sell what I like, knowing full well that "worth" is not taken into consideration when rating a PCGS set. Anyone want to unload one of those "worthless" MS68 silver Roosies or Wash quarters out there?
If you own a MS68 condition rarity even if it only has a weight of 1 you are still ahead of the other guy who owns an MS67. So a collector has a 1932D quarter with a weight of 10 in XF-45 and gets 450 points. Who cares, when you get your MS64 you will have 640 points. It all balances out when the sets are complete.
Everyone that looks at the sets knows who's is more valuable and who's is better. If that number out to the side is that important to you focus on the key heavier weighted coins first. That will pretty much ensure you are ranked as high as possible at all times. If the coins are just not available in the grade you want than I guess patience is the word of the day.
There is no way to establish one system that is perfect for all the different series. Market grading, bad idea. Even if PCGS could get their price guides fixed you cannot place a fixed value on condition rarities. That would lead to "I paid $XXX,XXX.XX on this coin so my set is worth more than his, this coin is worth that" and someone else saying "You overpaying for that coin is your problem, that does not make your set better than mine". PCGS does not even list a value for most condition rarities due to them being so thinly traded it is impossible to set a fixed value.
There has to be a "one standard" way of ranking all the different series. Can you imagine the nightmare and cost PCGS would incur trying to establish a different weighing standard for every different series taking into account the ever changing condition, variety, and date/mint mark rarties? Having to constantly monitor each and every coin in each and every series for changes so the weight system could be constantly updated before someone complains because they think they should be #11 instead on #12? The weights would be changing from time to time where one day you could be #3 and the next #5 without any activity within the set. Then everyone would be complaining again because they don’t agree. That would put an end to the Registry due to cost effectiveness.
PCGS has decided the most practical way is a weight system based on Varity and date/mint mark rarities for series and overall high value series and varieties for type collections. All in all it works pretty good and even the condition rarities do factor in although only more so when the set is complete.
NOTHING WILL EVER MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY.
It is their game that you elect to play. If you don’t like the rules?
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Of course, the prices of coins are themselves affected by their "point value" in the registry. Recogizing the "uncertainty principle" that the "thing observed changes when it is observed," any change in "point-value" that might be adopted would somewhat re-skew the prices, in a mutually interactive process.
By way of illustration: we all "know" that cameo proofs are "better" than brilliant proofs, right? But would the price differentials between these kinds of high-grade proofs be as pronounced if PGCS hadn't codified this "doctrine" in how it weights proof coinage? Would a unique example of a proof coin in the highest grade cost one-fifth the price of one of five DCAM examples a grade or two lower if "points," as well as aesthetics weren't involved? How about heads, steps and bands?
In the Registry Game, "worth" is not a truly independent standard.
William S. Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night
I know I'll never have the top 36-58 set as long as Stewart is collecting, but I enjoy the set I have at number 2. I bought the coins I like instead of buying the points, or the grade on the holder for that matter. Several of my coins would challenge any for top honors. Especially the 37 and 38 in 66CAM. Will I continue to upgrade? You bet. White Fang
Maybe I am naive, but I don't think collectors who have sets at the top of the Registry are buying the hype, the plastic, or the points.
makes good sense.......i know you wouldnt pass on my wonder quarter would ya.........remember it got a 13 ( out of a scale of 1 to 10) from " the boss"
see you in longbeach.........since you missed new york...i`ll bring some monsters ....and hope to score a few more 13s from the boss
ttyl
gregg
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
Hi Doug,
At least you were able to buy a few coins in the 36-58 set !!!!!
I can't afford to buy nor do i understand why a proof 1937 Lincoln cent is worth more than $ 10,000 or for that matter a not so nice proof 1936 Lincoln cent which sells on Teletrade for $5,000 is worth $20,000 a few months later.
Do you want to be naive ? Of course collectors with top registry sets are sometimes buying hype, plastic and high grades. Do you think that dealers eat the overgraded slabs.There have been times that myself as well as yourself have not been happy for the coin in an overgraded holder.It is then we must become true collectors and then either downgrade the coin or sell it.Real Collectors don't eat overgraded coins either.
This is why I like the idea of a showdown......If you accept
and PCGS arranges it .......
I challenge you to a showdown 1936 -1958 proof Lincoln cents
Stewart
Yes, Stewart, I agree with you on those points, but I do "try" to buy the coin, and have been caught buying the holder. My first mistake with this was with Matte Proof Lincolns, which I love. I bought some "slabs" so that my set would be complete, but I was very unhappy and sold them all but the best. My set is not complete right now, but I am far happier with it. My 1914 is the most stunning. It is in a 66red holder, but that doesn't adequately convey the feeling you get when you look at that coin.
I would love to have a showdown, if for nothing else just to look at your collection!
I agree to a showdown. I am working on one upgrade right now which I hope to add by then.
By the way, I didn't pay over $10,000 for the 37. It was a friendly deal between collectors/friends, and I think I paid a fair amount for it.
You are dead on about the 36. In fact the story I head was that this person (who shall remain nameless) bought the coin in a Heritage auction for about $5000, had it slabbed "CAM", put it on Teletrade and bought it from himself for $15,000, and then listed it for over $20,000. He still has it in his inventory I'm told. Yet another spin on the term "market maker."
makes good sense.......i know you wouldnt pass on my wonder quarter would ya.........remember it got a 13 ( out of a scale of 1 to 10) from " the boss"
Greg: I likely would not pass on your wonder quarter provided you did not price it beyond "rediculous"
Now, bear in mind that your quarter is no longer the only "13" awarded by the "boss". The "boss" recently graded the color on the PCGS-PR69 Shield nickel (scans up on my site) a "13". So, your coin is no longer "pop 1" and should be worth less.
tell the boss.......i am going to bring a box full for grading.....and i am going to try to " peg out" the bosses grading meter and try....key word try to peg a "14"..............if i cant produce at least he will of had a blast looking
c u in lb
gregg
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
that "13" graded shield nickel resided here in houston for an awefully long time....and is by far as cool as there is
:-)
gregg
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
Stewart
As far as the 1937 PR66 CAM goes,I can attest to what doug has said.He purchased it because I offered it to him at a fair price.It seemed to fit his collection better than my own.He didn't pay $10,000 for it,but I still believe that is what it is worth.A pop 1 coin should go for a premium,but not some of the prices being asked necessaryily.IMHO
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
The only solution is to do what you are doing - have a "in person" challenge and let knowledgable collectors decide. I've wondered why the EAC has never done this on a large scale. It would put some meaning into the hypothetical "condition census" rankings. I'm looking forward to seeing the sets and putting in my vote.
Doug and Don- Before I was a board member,I was told your 1937 was for sale from Wayne Herndon.He either mentioned $10,000 or $15,000 for the coin. I was stunned.It seems the longer I collect,the more I have to learn.
I am extremely happy that Doug owns the coin as he seems like a true collector.I would like to see the coin !!!!!
Perhaps I can instigate another "showdown with matte proof Lincolns.Two other sets which are worthwhile exhibiting are both unregistered. I will work to get either or both registered.
Maybe Mitch will arrange a showdown for 1955 s Lincoln cents to pick out the ms 68
Or maybe Monsterman will arrange a showdown " Pick out the13 on a scale from 1-10. I have a monster that is a 15 on a scale from 1-10 ........and I'm not talking inches
Stewart
When Don first decided to sell the 1937, the 1936 in 66CAM had just been made, offered, and reoffered for an incredible amount. There were a few other CAMs that popped onto the market, and it wasn't clear where the market was going after PCGS decided to recognize the CAM designation for pre-50 proofs. It created some serious questions about the value of the 1937. In the end, it was a three coin deal and Don and I agreed on a realistic value for the coin.
Also at the same time there was a 51DCAM and a 52 DCAM that were being offered for over $30,000 -- each!!! It was a strange couple of months. The coingods were baffling us.
I think I am going to go out to Long Beach next month, and we can meet.
Funny, I told my wife that there was going to be a showdown of the top sets in the Indian Head Cent Series and I wanted to go. The first thing she said was, "They are not for sale, are they???" I think I scared her to death. I'll have to make up something good if we have a Lincoln Proof Showdown.
Or maybe Monsterman will arrange a showdown " Pick out the13 on a scale from 1-10. I have a monster that is a 15 on a scale from 1-10 ........and I'm not talking inches"
Stewart: Does one ever forget their first love? How could such a contest even be fair when the "championship grading team" will only be thinking "blue swirl".
The toning "boss" is just turning 11 years old - keep it clean
Wondercoin.
As Doug said it was a (3) coin deal with some cash.Had I sold it outright I was looking for $10,000.As I said,I believe that is what the coin is worth.Everyone who has seen it believes the coin is graded properly.I'm sure if you and Doug can get together,you'll agree also.Based on oyher pop 1 coins values,I didn't think I was being unreasonable on my asking price.
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
Don - Never leave money on the table or the sharks will tell everyone how they picked you off.You were not being unreasonable,but like I said it was a new designation and I had no idea how prices evolve.
Doug - Invite your wife! By all means. I will send B.J. an e-mail telling her we have agreed and the ball is in her court.
Stewart
i couldnt agree more....eye apeal is everything ( within the grade ....i mean comparing a 62 to 67 isnt fair most of the time)...that being said ........there are some collectors out there who "buy the plastic"...and they will learn when selling time comes.....a few too many people ( in the commem series) think they have the " bomb".....for example they have off white toned this or that and they average 66 .5 and they think they got you beat.......while the " sharpie" has a 66.3 average and they are all monster toned mooses......i dont have to tell ya who would do better in an auction....and when the 66.3 guys kicks bu$$ in the auction....THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN...........and the plastic buyer puts his tail between his legs and goes home wondering what happened!!!
i have been doing this for 30 years and i am here to tell ya not a year has gone by where eye appeal has not gotten more important every single year.....year in and year out!!!!
to avoid the plastic buyer and the FACTS that the registry can not reflect ( by the dim-whitted design ).....i crossed all my pcgs coins to NGC where they reflect what a pq coin with excellent eye appeal is.......with the STAR*.........at ngc STAR* coins get added regisrty points .....AND THAT IS HOW MONSTER EYE APPEAL SMOKES PLASTIC BUYERS......which is something pcgs cant do
look here>>>>>>http://www.ngccoin.com/gallery/enews/>>>>>
gregg
ps ......rule # 1.....res ipsa loquidor ( the thing ( coin ) speaks for itself)..........pcgs...ngc....it doesnt matter ( but monster toned coins look better with a white backround)....when its time to sell........it just doesnt matter...they will bring all the money......
pss....on the other hand i did have a lesser grading service begged me to put my set in their holders......i knew id of gotten numerous upgrades..........but at selling time any inflated grades would of gotten net graded.............so my antietam would of been reduced back down to ms 69 money rather than the ms 70 they pregraded it
speaking of ms 69 antietams....did you see my coins little brother anaconda has for sale.......gezzzzzz that was the best raw card of anything i ever bought ............and here is a little diddy for the newbees...for my telling you will might keep you going
.........i bought that card ( 5 raw coins ) from a dealer....who wrote a book on the subject ( commems)..........when the buzz on the floor got around that 2 were graded 69 and two 68 and one 67.........i am sure he almost died..........you see he left almost 100,000 on the table.....and he hasnt talked to me since!!!!
so you see there is tons of opportunity out here waiting for you......am i a genius............NOT.........i just work hard and put my pants on one leg at a time like everybody else
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language