#1 PCGS REGISTRY SET FAILS TO REACH EBAY RESERVE

MoneyLA · January 30, 2002 1:37PM

Hi, my proof washington silver set did not meet the reserve. High bid on ebay was $8,600 and there were more than one-thousand views of the auction which makes me feel good that there was such interest. cheers, alan mendelson

Bcsican · January 30, 2002 2:17PM

Tough to say why so many tire kickers and no buyers, this economy is still a big factor. Was there room to play with the price,

MoneyLA · January 30, 2002 2:34PM

Hi, this was NOT a "distress sale" and the reserve I set was a price that I would have been happy to sell the set at. Below that reserve, I'm just as happy keeping the set together. cheers, alan

supercoin · January 30, 2002 2:46PM

Glad to see you got that much interest!

If you still want to sell you might contact the high-bidder. He may have bid close to your reserve -- the $8600 is just enough to put him ahead of the under-bidder, not necessarily his maximum.

MoneyLA · January 30, 2002 2:51PM

Thanks Supercoin, you are correct -- the high bidder's $8600 was just an increment above the next highest bidder. Indeed, I have emailed him. In the meantime, I received emails from a couple of "interested parties" about a private sale. I'm going to give the high bidder preference now, but also am considering cutting my "reserve" a few hundred if that would make the buyer happy and would allow me to make my "move" in the coin market to a new area. cheers, Alan

colorman3 · January 30, 2002 8:08PM

Money LA

colorman3 · January 30, 2002 8:10PM

Money LA

Isn't PCGS making some changes to that set. Something to do with weighting and DCAMS. If its true,
your set will be impacted tremendously. Whats up with that ??

colorman3

MoneyLA · January 31, 2002 4:57AM

The changes have already been made. The set is still ranked #1. cheers, alan

pop1 · January 31, 2002 5:18AM

How many cams, and how many Dcams are in your set?

MoneyLA · January 31, 2002 7:23AM

No cams and no dcams. just five proof-70s and I think 12 of the 22 coins are the highest graded proofs available. cheers, alan

pop1 · January 31, 2002 7:38AM

I think that's probably why you had so many tire kickers.
To me, it is a surprised that a #1 set has no cams or d-cams. I don't think the pf70s are considered "highest graded". I think the following is commonly accepted:
pf70 = pf69cam = pf68dcam.
Personally, I would rather have a pf68dcam over a pf70 any day of the week. Good luck with the sale.

MoneyLA · January 31, 2002 8:53AM

Pop1 you raise the issue that I wrestled with years ago when I started my set: do I go for the highest dcam coin available or the highest graded coin available. Several dealers at the time explained that the highest grade point was the key factor as the point-value demonstrated the preservation and strike of the coin, but the cam or dcam appearance represented strike value. As a result, I went for the highest point-grade available.

I did have a second set of cam and dcam coins including a few pr69dcams -- but I sold those as the pr70's were added to my set. My second set is long gone.

The the shock -- PCGS changed the rules.

It surprises me and even shocks me that pr68dcams now equal pr70 coins, and that the pr69dcams I used to own are now superior in registry points to the PR70 coins -- even the 1960 and 1963 pr70's that have a pop of only four each.

It grieves me that the rules were changed. Did I indicate that before?

Oh well.

Anyway my decision was to go for the high points, not necessarily the cam or strike. I leave the frosting to those who love Betty Crocker Numismatics.

cheers, alan mendelson

pop1 · January 31, 2002 10:15AM

Well, Money, I am sincerely sorry you followed this path.
When I started the proof Franklins years ago, I trusted Wondercoin and Rick at R&I, both members of this forum. All agreed at that time, that a pf70 was (far) inferior to a pf68dcam, way before pcgs registry set rules were established.
It is very sad that you were given the "supportive assistance" in your purchases, that you describe.
I really hope you didn't trade your pf69dcams for the pf70s.

**Who, if you don't mind me asking, could have possibly guided, and assisted you in dumping your most valuable coins?**

MoneyLA · January 31, 2002 11:42AM

Pop1 -- There was a distinct difference in the history of the two sets -- the Franklins and the Washingtons. My Franklin collection, though not listed in the registry, also contains dcam coins. The difference is that the Washington series has a significant date run of proof-70s -- from 1960 to 1964. The proof franklins do not, and clearly have been always been collected for their dcam surfaces. In fact, I don't think there ever was a pr70 Franklin ever graded-- therefore the top set was indeed the pr69dcam coins. Had there been pr70 Franklins, including a date run of them, I think the emphasis on the set would have been different. But since there are no pr70s to collect, I do not dispute that a Frank dcam collection is the way to go.

However, when it comes to the proof Washingtons, there are only four possible sets that can contain all of the proof-70 coins, and I have one of them. I suspect there is one other collector who can possibly have all five of the proof-70 coins because I sold him the 1961 that he needed and believe he still has the date run of all five pr70 coins.

cheers, alan

pop1 · January 31, 2002 12:00PM

Differences agreed. But PCGS registry set rules aside, and in general, pf70s are not worth what a pf68dcam is worth, to most.
Why did you decide to take this route?
No offense intended, just curious who sent you along this path: Did you decide to go for the registry points over the coin on your own?

MJCoin · January 31, 2002 1:18PM

I've alway's felt the DCAM's were the way to go for three reasons. #1 the beauty, #2 first strikes off new dies, and #3 the rarity. Give me a PF68DCAM anyday over a PF70. I may sound like Rick T. but I stand by my feelings 101%.

MoneyLA · January 31, 2002 2:22PM

Pop1 -- actually I had two sets of proof washingtons for a while. I had a brilliant proof set which included the pr70s, and I had a cameo set which included dcams that I could afford. I put these two sets together BEFORE I knew about the PCGS Registry.

Once I found out about the registry I sold off my cams and dcams because they carried no extra weight, and my brilliant set was in fact a "higher grade set."

THEN THE RULES CHANGED and like others who complained, I complained -- and LOST.

Yes, I sold off the PR68dcams as well as the PR69dcams as well as some nice cameo coins from the earlier years, but they were not the very high grade point cameos -- but nice coins nonetheless.

So, the bottom line is -- had I held onto my cams and dcams and combined those two sets today my #1 set would have an even higher point score in the registry than what it has now.

cheers, alan

pop1 · January 31, 2002 2:43PM

pop1 · January 31, 2002 2:50PM

May I ask: Did you get caught up in the registry "thing", thus making the independent decisions you have outliined?
Did some dealers try to direct you in another direction, ie., "keep/get the dcams, screw the registry"?
I'm sorry for being blunt, but, it seems that you are being honest here with us, and worthy of opinion. Thank you.

wondercoin · January 31, 2002 3:33PM

I appreciated the fact Alan gave me a shot at acquiring his collection a week before he posted his ebay auction. We were very close to putting a deal together.

Alan went one direction with the PR70's and the market kind of went the other direction, in part, because of the quality issues associated with many of the PR70 coins. Of course, Alan's PR70 coins could, in fact, be perfect, but the general perception of many collectors is most PR70s are not perfect, so the PR69DCAM is a much more desireable coin. Hindsight is always 20-20.

But, no question, Alan's set has the foundation for a world class proof quarter set. Some quick substitutes of those PR69 coins with PR68DCAM and PR69DCAM pieces, and the set is well on its way to top status. Alan, if you don't need the money right now, I would sustitute out the PR69 coins for DCAM's leaving the (5) PR70's for now. The set would really become an attractive acquisition imho

Wondercoin.

MoneyLA · January 31, 2002 3:41PM

Mitch, thanks for your input, your knowledge is always appreciated.

Pop1 -- in fact, one very, very well known and prominent dealer steered me away from the cam and dcam coins about two years ago-- indicating I was better off going after the highest grade coins. That turned out to be a mistake. I dont want to name the dealer publicly as we have had several confidential discussions. But if I named him, you would definitely know who he is, his business and his outstanding reputation.

As Mitch pointed out in hindsight that was a wrong decision, and when I sold off my cam and dcam coins that was another wrong decision.

Still -- and unless the rules change AGAIN -- it's still the #1 set. And I enjoy seeing it #1.

cheers to all, alan

pop1 · January 31, 2002 4:29PM

Thanks again, Alan, for your honesty. I am embarassed for our collective collectors, and especially our respected dealers, and tremendously concerned about the dealer you mention. If anyone deserves an opportunity at the best cams and dcams, I think it is you. Hearing that your sale wasn't a "fire sale", is good. I hope you remain #1.
Thanks, again.

supercoin · January 31, 2002 4:41PM

Geez... it's not like he sold his first-born or something.

I suspect Alan has done quite well with price appreciation on his set, possibly even better than he might have with the DCAMs, depending on what the dates and grades were.

pop1 · January 31, 2002 4:45PM

I was wondering if, and how you would follow up your prior statement of moderation.
What's your point, Tad, other than putting a positive spin on the "nonsense", or "soft-soaping"? This guy got bad advice.
As a professional, I assume you had previously warned him of this (potentially) tragic outcome. (Just my humble opinion)

supercoin · January 31, 2002 4:59PM

What's your point other than negative nonsense?

Reading this thread, it sounds like someone died or something.

He decided to pursue perfection over cameo, and I assume (given the time period over which he put the set together), if he sells would probably make a good buck in doing so. This is a tragedy?

In other words,

pop1 · January 31, 2002 5:01PM

Your pic looks like the "Where's the beef?" ladies.
Isn't that the point????
The "beef" is in the dcams.

supercoin · January 31, 2002 5:04PM

Hey, knock it off with the past-post editing... I'll have readers know my little insult was a return volley, not the serve!

BTW, for the record, I didn't sell any of these coins to Alan. And I think I could hardly make my position on PR70s more well-known without renting billboard space on Ventura highway.

pop1 · January 31, 2002 5:08PM

All I can see is: Over a thousand tire kickers can't be wrong.
Sorry for the bluntness.

At least one dealer made a boo-boo.

supercoin · January 31, 2002 5:57PM

If you're saying it was "wrong" because you like cameo instead of perfection, well that's an opinion you're entitled to.

It sounds like Alan's main concern is that he let go of some registry points for his set.

Outside of that, I wouldn't make any assumptions -- about his enjoyment of the collection, or how his PR70s have performed monetarily compared to lower-grade DCAMs. Particularly if those DCAMs were bought at a signficant premium from a dealer already mentioned.

Despite my personal feelings about PR70s, many have performed very well from a financial standpoint if the timing was right.

Regarding the tire kicking on his auction without a buyer -- that could easily be due to them being auctioned by an individual, and with no return policy. That's a big chunk of change to ask someone to lay out sight-unseen to an unknown party.

A bunch of assumptions on my part, but you're making them too, unless you've got knowledge outside this thread.

I also happen to prefer cameo to perfection, but that doesn't change my original point: If he doubles his money while collecting something he enjoys, hey, I'm not going to beat that up.

CarlWohlforth · January 31, 2002 11:17PM

Thanks Alan for sharing. I too appreciate the honesty.

In fact that is what I appreciate in dealers also. Clearly they can't all be right as they tend to disagree a lot

I think many of us enjoy the frosty look of a cameo, but that doesn't necessarily make buying brilliant coins wrong. Who knows what the outcome of the modern condition rarity argument will be? (don't answer!)

The dealers who need scolding are those who are not honest, not those who have an opinion.

wondercoin · February 1, 2002 1:22AM

Look, we are "all big boys and girls here". Of course, pop 1 is correct in his assessment of "where's the beef". Indeed, I recently sold a single DCAM Wash. quarter for many times the value of this ENTIRE #1 set and that coin was sold to a top dealer. Anyone who believes or suggests that regular non-cameo PR70 coins have performed as well a finest known DCAM material (1950-1964) over the past 4 years, is completely out of touch with the market. In fact, I just came across a box of a couple PR70 coins from this era, which I never got around to selling a few years back. They are worth less than what I could have obtained for the coins several years ago.

In any event, even if some of these PR70 coins performed well, it is only a % basis nice performance anyway. In other words, if you bought a PR70 years ago for $250 and now it is worth $400, you did great on a % basis filling that slot with that coin. However, if you missed your opportunity to buy the 1958 quarter in PCGS-PR69DCAM for around $2000 (go check out Teletrade) because you weren't collecting DCAM coins last year, you may have missed an opportunity to capture THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF PROFIT on a single coin!! I am aware of collectors making $10,000+ profit or more on a single CAM or DCAM coin from the 1950-1964 era in the past 4 years in Washington Quarters/Franklins, etc. Suggesting, that a $250 PR70 coin jumped to $400 for a slot in that set is utter nonsense, imho. I just call them like I see them

Wondercoin.

CarlWohlforth · February 1, 2002 1:41AM

When it comes to investments one should only think in terms of percentages, never in absolute terms. That is the only way to compare apples to apples. The goal is to make a good return on your money, not make $50,000 in one trade. After all if I invested $150 million I'd be very upset to make only $50K

Look, if your gig is to go for the big score, that's cool. Maybe somebody else does well with lots of smaller transactions. Investment wise both are successful strategies. Neither one is right or wrong. But in either case if you forget about thinking in percentages you are setting yourself up for an expensive mistake.

MoneyLA · February 1, 2002 3:23AM

Guys... take it easy. I think the dealer -- and other dealers who gave me the advice on brilliants over cameos -- just make a mistake. I dont think they were out to cheat me. It was a judgment call, and they were wrong. Gosh, I've made lots of wrong decisions, and fortunately none was life threatening! LOL. Im still proud of the brilliant set I put together, and while dcams may have performed better -- my pr70s were picked up generally for a fraction of today's selling prices. I think I did well should I decide to ever sell the set.

As I said from the beginning, I will only sell if I get an offer that makes it worthwhile to sell, otherwise, Im happy to hold on to these coins. Each and everyone of them is special, and as I discussed with Mitch, the 61, 62 and 64 pr70s were carefully chosen to keep among many that I have handled in the past few years. The 60 and 63, with a pop of 4 each, were the ONLY ones I could get my hands on and they are true gems.

cheers. ENJOY. alan

#1 PCGS REGISTRY SET FAILS TO REACH EBAY RESERVE

Comments