Why top pops are the best
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,205 ✭✭✭✭✭
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,205 ✭✭✭✭✭
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,205 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Sour grapes: In order for me to have a poptop Dahlonega half eagle or New Orleans eagle, I would have to spend between one and two years of my coin allowance on a single coin!
My philosophy: Collecting is not a competition for me. Having the "best" is of little import. Frankly, in the series I collect, nice AU coins are often more attractive than the baggy UNCs.
Patience: The poptop coins are in tightly held collections and do not change hands but once or twice a generation. I cannot wait 25 years to get my 1861-D $5!
pay up for a couple coins in my set.
ownership knowing that a coin is probably unimproveable. One can relax about at
least that one coin knowing there'll be no need to upgrade it at least in the near fu-
ture. The coin itself most fully represents what the designer had in mind as he carv-
ed the plasters.
Obviously a collector can feel the same pride with an AU, and once he gets his desired
grade there is no necessity to upgrade. And no doubt one can see the designer's intent
in any well preserved coin. But this detracts NOTHING from the highest grade coin. To
each his own.
3 "DAMMIT BOYS"
4 "YOU SUCKS"
Numerous POTD (But NONE officially recognized)
Seated Halves are my specialty !
Seated Half set by date/mm COMPLETE !
Seated Half set by WB# - 289 down / 31 to go !!!!!
(1) "Smoebody smack him" from CornCobWipe !
IN MEMORY OF THE CUOF
<< <i>Is a "Shriver" in 70 any better looking than a "Shriver" in 68 ???? >>
No, but I bet she was decent looking at 19.
peacockcoins
<< <i>Is a "Shriver" in 70 any better looking than a "Shriver" in 68 ???? >>
No. This may be the one coin that's unimprovable in AG-3.
" think in a lot of cases that there's an immense amount of quality for the money. For an underpop coin, you know that it's within a half a grade of the assigned grade. But a top pop coin can in some cases be a full grade or a grade and a half higher in quality than the assigned grade. That's value."
You're kidding right. Use a smiley face when you're making statements that are tongue in cheek.
Value...not when you're paying 20x ~ 100X the price of the coin just below it in grade. "Immense amount of quality for the money"...that immense increase in quality is ususually a matter of avoiding a few miniscule marks assuming we're talking accurately grade coins.
Come on guys. These shouts about outstanding, superior quality and wanting the very, very best when we're talking MS67 ~ 70 coins is making a mountain out of an ant hill. With all due respect unless you're examining these coins under high magnification where the overall beauty and appearance of the coin is obscured anyway these discussions about superior quality are IMHO myopic.
I have a PCGS ms66 1947-D Walker in my set, and while checking one of the on-line dealers that I have bought from several times, I noticed he had a 1947-D in PCGS ms67, (top pop 5 none higher), with a price tag of $12,500.00...... I had him send it to me on approval..... I told him upfront that my Walker was very high end for the assigned grade, but I would like to see the one he had, since it did have all the qualities I look for in Walkers, but from the photos on his website you couldn't really see all of the attributes that made this coin ms67 "top pop".
When I received the Walker from this dealer I compared it to the one I have in ms66, and low and behold my ms66 was every bit as nice, (if not nicer), than the one in the ms67 holder, technically, and in all other respects!!!
My point here is that buying a "top pop" is fine, as long as it is properly graded as such. But just buying a top pop because the "holder' says that it is, is a big mistake sometimes IMHO
The registry craze will die out in a year or two when people realize how easy it is to make a "top" set in some modern series.
In the non moderns the resubmissions will kill the pops and it will look like new ones are being made....or are they?
Too much of a good thing will kill the registry concept and pop tops.
I would love to see NGC/PCGS correct the problem.
<< <i>.
Value...not when you're paying 20x ~ 100X the price of the coin just below it in grade. "Immense amount of quality for the money"...that immense increase in quality is ususually a matter of avoiding a few miniscule marks assuming we're talking accurately grade coins.
. >>
The price of both the pop top and the undergrade are determined by supply and demand.
If you can change either the supply or the demand for either of these coins then you can
affect the premium. Otherwise you're just tilting at windmills.
<< <i>Pop tops are sucker bets in moderns when new pop tops can be made at the whim of a grader and there are plenty of coins left to grade.
The registry craze will die out in a year or two when people realize how easy it is to make a "top" set in some modern series.
In the non moderns the resubmissions will kill the pops and it will look like new ones are being made....or are they?
Too much of a good thing will kill the registry concept and pop tops.
I would love to see NGC/PCGS correct the problem. >>
Very good point! Especially about "new ones being made....or are they?
How often does PCGS and NGC update the pop reports?
Michael
<< <i>Pop tops are sucker bets in moderns when new pop tops can be made at the whim of a grader and there are plenty of coins left to grade.
. >>
People should be collectors first and foremost, but so far those of us buying moderns are just getting killed.
Many of us have obscene paper profits and many others have actually cashed in and have to lug this fiat
currency to the bank. After they pay to get their hernias repaired then they have monstous tax bills. This
is obviously a sucker bet.
People who enjoy pop tops in the classics are having very similar problems and they'll have to pay to have
their employees' hernias repaired because of all the heavy lifting. Then there's insurance and workmen's comp and all.
Best to stay away from this crap and poke fun at the people who enjoy collecting, dealing or investing in it.
If you can change either the supply or the demand for either of these coins then you can
affect the premium. Otherwise you're just tilting at windmills."
Understood. I think the debate is over the rationale used by some in paying the prices realized for those top pops. Of course it's the buyers money but I still and always will question the value accessment that assigns 99% of a coins value to a couple of miniscule marks. Their preogative but it's a sign IMHO of an undue focus on one very narrow aspect of the overall characteristics of the coin.
<< <i>
<< <i>Is a "Shriver" in 70 any better looking than a "Shriver" in 68 ???? >>
No, but I bet she was decent looking at 19. >>
Not if Maria is any example of what she looked like.