No I will NOT fire Brenden!
ultimatecameo
Posts: 244
I was first alerted this morning to several "interesting" threads going on the PCGS forum. Some of them were in response to threads from one of my employees, Brenden.
Brenden is a very nice young man who works part time with us, helping Alex (another nice guy) on our website. Brenden is just out of high school, working towards his pilot's license. When he comes into work I will have a "fatherly" sit-down with him about posting threads. He apparently wrote some things that may not be entirely "accurate".
I sincerely apologize for not being as available as some would like, but I AM available! My favorite part of my work continues to be "talking coins" with fellow collectors - over the phone. I do not often write into the forum because I have found that I can quickly find myself spending 1-2 hours a day on it, which takes away from time I need to be devoting to my cameo proof book project.
I started working on this book project regarding U.S. proof coins from 1858 to the present a few years ago, and invite ALL collectors interested to participate. I just finished the section on proof Franklins, and am currently working on the Washington quarters.
One of the goals of the book will be to have COLOR pictures of as many "finest known" cameo proofs from the pre-1972 era as possible, as well as some later-date issues in PR70DCAM.
THE OBJECTIVE of the book is to give collectors the most OBJECTIVE information possible on approximate rarities, current values, and eye-appeal characteristics of each date.
ON ANOTHER NOTE....
Buying Sight-unseen
I get offered lots and lots of coins. I do not like to buy sight-unseen, because I prefer to pay strong money whenever I can, and like almost everyone else have had those occasions when the coin I acquired sight-unseen did not exactly fit the grade on the holder.
I am most interested in what I call "RT Quality Recommendation" coins. These coins do not have to be high grade, or expensive. They are often priced under $100. What they DO all have in common is that they are attractive (nice eye-appeal) for their date and grade.
Regarding proof coins -
I am always interested in INCREDIBLE pre-1977 cameo proof coinage, but most especially pre-1968, which would include SMS coinage. Grade is secondary to cameo contrast.
Rick T.
0
Comments
<< <i>Brenden is just out of high school >>
That explains a lot.
<< <i>My favorite part of my work continues to be "talking coins" with fellow collectors - over the phone. >>
I can attest to that.
Russ, NCNE
RYK -
What does AT vs. NT mean?
Russ, NCNE
Still waiting!
Camelot
Is that an Accented Hair.
And what grade is the 1966?
Bite me.
Russ, NCNE
The ongoing controversy of artificial toning vs. natural toning. It is completely off-topic to what has been going on here lately (nothing to do with you or R&I).
<< <i>Russ,
Is that an Accented Hair. >>
Yep. PR68DCAM.
<< <i>And what grade is the 1966? >>
MS66DCAM.
Larger image:
Russ, NCNE
Still waiting!
Bite me.
I returned to the hobby six years ago. Due to my purchase of your first book on cameos I am a collector of 1950-70 raw cameos. Many other forum members are also cameo fans and can also trace their own spark of interest to your book. Thank you for your efforts in the field. I look forward to your newest book project and will definitely purchase a copy of same when it is released.
Years ago I called your company, stated I was going to be in the Encinitas area, that I had some raw cameos that I was interested in selling and asked if an R&I rep would be willing to meet me to look at my coins. I was told that R&I did not purchase raw coins.
I am curious about whether R&I buys raw cameos or only buys slabbed coins? Also, for persons who do not live in San Diego County, how would a potential seller [of raw and/or of slabbed cameos] go about showing coins to R&I? Does R&I have any of its representatives travel the show circuit to buy coins?
Thanks, SanctionII.
People have gotten very, very good at artifically toning coins to the point where the grading service's are so skittish they are REJECTING coins as questionable that I know are genuine.
As artifical toning techniques continue to "evolve" I'm not sure what the grading services can do to detect some of these fakes.
I think it is a bigger problem with the most recent, very modern coinage struck the last couple decades, with collectors willing to pay huge premiums for proof Ike dollars of questionable origin, etc.
It comes down to "How much of a premium am I willing to pay for this toned coin if I am unsure about its originality?"
I remember buying a CAMEO Peace dollar for $50. It was obviously fake. But it was pretty to look at and an interesting conversation piece. But it should never be offered as anything other than what it really is - a beautiful artificial cameo Peace dollar.
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
I made it very clear to RT when I talked to him on the phone this morning that I thought Brenden was only trying to help and that I didnt want him to get into trouble.
I think that everyone here would not want anyone to lose their job over the threads...
John
siliconvalleycoins.com
Why?
Scenario:
Imagine that you happen to have a very, very nice 1959 cameo proof Franklin. The cameo contrast is exceptional. There is a hairline or two. If submitted I may believe the coin would most likely grade PR66CAM if submitted to PCGS, in which case the coin would be worth about $150 to me, figuring after submission costs etc it would be a $250-$350 coin.
However, the coin is borderline CAM/DCAM. What would the coin be worth if PCGS believed the coin just slipped into their DCAM classification, and that the tiny hairline was insignificant, and that the coin was a Proof 67?
A 1959 PR67DCAM might be worth $10,000 to $15,000 in a PCGS holder.
But I have to buy the coin according to what I believe will be the most likely grade.
This is a very common scenario (not necessarily involving a 1959 cameo Franklin!!!), as 10% - 15% of coins submitted fall into a "grey" area.
The next show I will likely be attending is F.U.N. We were at ANA.
We do plan on attending more shows when our new office is completed.
What do you think of this sellers Cameos?
My posts viewed
since 8/1/6
siliconvalleycoins.com
Cameron Kiefer
<< <i>Feel free Brendon to post any age- appropriate naked cheerleader pictures if you wish. >>
Ummm. No. That will get him banned.
Cameron Kiefer
<< <i>
<< <i>Feel free Brendon to post any age- appropriate naked cheerleader pictures if you wish. >>
Ummm. No. That will get him banned.
Cameron Kiefer >>
But he will be much more popular.
<< <i>
Imagine that you happen to have a very, very nice 1959 cameo proof Franklin. The cameo contrast is exceptional. There is a hairline or two. If submitted I may believe the coin would most likely grade PR66CAM if submitted to PCGS, in which case the coin would be worth about $150 to me, figuring after submission costs etc it would be a $250-$350 coin.
However, the coin is borderline CAM/DCAM. What would the coin be worth if PCGS believed the coin just slipped into their DCAM classification, and that the tiny hairline was insignificant, and that the coin was a Proof 67?
A 1959 PR67DCAM might be worth $10,000 to $15,000 in a PCGS holder.
But I have to buy the coin according to what I believe will be the most likely grade.
>>
In other words, oftentimes even the "experts" do not know the value of a coin. And, that many buy the holder, not the coin.
To some extent we are all at the mercy of the grading services. I may believe a coin is deserving of a certain grade, but the grading service always has the final word. We do not always agree, and indeed I am certain that graders within the respective services' do not always agree with each other. There always will be that area of subjectivity that relegates a small percentage of coins to that "grey area".
That also is why the grading services' offer the "regrade" process. It is an admission on their part that a coin may in fact not always be the grade they originally encapsulated it at.