Options
I Have A Great Idea!
questor54
Posts: 1,351 ✭
One of the areas of the hobby that could generate a lot of revenue is 'sight-unseen' trading. That is, making coins fungible objects where any MS63 1922 Peace Dollar is interchangeable with any other MS63 1922 Peace Dollar. This would allow 'stock exchange' style trading of coins, and possibly the development of derivative financial instruments such as coin futures.
Standing in the way of this idea is the current transparent nature of slabs. You can actually SEE the coin inside the slab! And some, even at the same grade, are better than others!
To expedite sight-unseen trading I suggest that all future slabs be made opaque, so you can see the label clearly, but you CANNOT see the coin inside the slab.
I think this would help a lot.
Your comments please?
Standing in the way of this idea is the current transparent nature of slabs. You can actually SEE the coin inside the slab! And some, even at the same grade, are better than others!
To expedite sight-unseen trading I suggest that all future slabs be made opaque, so you can see the label clearly, but you CANNOT see the coin inside the slab.
I think this would help a lot.
Your comments please?
0
Comments
Bottom line is, no two coin will ever be the same. I'd much rather have the MS65.9 coin and leave the MS65.0 or the lucky upgrade version to someone else.
And if you can't see 'em, the emperor definitely does have no clothes.
Why even bother with the holders? You could just have a Coinmex warehouse where PCGS and NGC store all the coins for you and issue a certificate of ownership.
You can then swap your certs willy nilly to your heart's content.
roadrunner
Coins with numismatic value are not commodities and cannot be made as such. One of the intents behind third-party grading was to support a commodity-type market for unseen trading. It didn't work then and won't work now. I can't see that placing coins in opaque holders, while an interesting idea, would help. Just imagine the issue with counterfeits coming from foreign countries. Now all they have to do is mimic the holder and place a weight inside.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
<< <i>Your idea is basically about 25 yrs old. At least from the idea on sight-unseen trading. Didn't quite work in 1987-1990 with even more issues today imo.
Bottom line is, no two coin will ever be the same. I'd much rather have the MS65.9 coin and leave the MS65.0 or the lucky upgrade version to someone else.
And if you can't see 'em, the emperor definitely does have no clothes.
roadrunner >>
I was around during the early days of slabbing and even in the early days you could still see the coin in the slab. I am proposing removing that destraction (of actually being able to see the coin) so coins can be traded as generic financial instruments.
<< <i>Drinking this early in the morning?
Coins with numismatic value are not commodities and cannot be made as such. One of the intents behind third-party grading was to support a commodity-type market for unseen trading. It didn't work then and won't work now. I can't see that placing coins in opaque holders, while an interesting idea, would help. Just imagine the issue with counterfeits coming from foreign countries. Now all they have to do is mimic the holder and place a weight inside. >>
Counterfeiting is a problem we would have to address through the use of holgrams, security strips with microprinting, and RFID chips embedded with the coin in the slab.
A 'hgh end' service could be developed called 'Invisibility Plus'. Invisibility Plus would laser scan the outside of the slab so it could be recognized if ever submitted again. (Every slab has it's own set of manufacturing imperfections, so each is laser-unique).
<< <i>Frank's not drinking... I made him think with one of my posts.
I take great pride in never thinking before I post something to this Board.
If it works for perfect coins it could be extended downward, it would also leave more room for stickers as the coin would not be in the way.
I do believe this is the ultimate evolution of the hobby, especially if computer grading is perfected..
<< <i>
<< <i>Frank's not drinking... I made him think with one of my posts.
I take great pride in never thinking before I post something to this Board. >>
I knew I had a twin!
<< <i>
<< <i>Drinking this early in the morning?
Coins with numismatic value are not commodities and cannot be made as such. One of the intents behind third-party grading was to support a commodity-type market for unseen trading. It didn't work then and won't work now. I can't see that placing coins in opaque holders, while an interesting idea, would help. Just imagine the issue with counterfeits coming from foreign countries. Now all they have to do is mimic the holder and place a weight inside. >>
Counterfeiting is a problem we would have to address through the use of holgrams, security strips with microprinting, and RFID chips embedded with the coin in the slab.
A 'hgh end' service could be developed called 'Invisibility Plus'. Invisibility Plus would laser scan the outside of the slab so it could be recognized if ever submitted again. (Every slab has it's own set of manufacturing imperfections, so each is laser-unique). >>
Submitted again? Would investors need to resubmit their financial instrument for verification? While the technology certainly exists to make counterfeiting difficult, requiring access to equipment to verify authenticity may inhibit individuals to use these financial instruments.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
<< <i>One of the areas of the hobby that could generate a lot of revenue is 'sight-unseen' trading. That is, making coins fungible objects where any MS63 1922 Peace Dollar is interchangeable with any other MS63 1922 Peace Dollar. This would allow 'stock exchange' style trading of coins, and possibly the development of derivative financial instruments such as coin futures.
Standing in the way of this idea is the current transparent nature of slabs. You can actually SEE the coin inside the slab! And some, even at the same grade, are better than others!
To expedite sight-unseen trading I suggest that all future slabs be made opaque, so you can see the label clearly, but you CANNOT see the coin inside the slab.
I think this would help a lot.
Your comments please? >>
Transparent slabs are perfectly fine for widgets as we've seen in recent price moves
"Don't fidget if you have a widget! Use Invisibility Plus!"
And to the visionary who suggested just having weights in the slabs rather than coins - yes! After all, the same thing is done today with depository receipts for silver and gold bullion! I am suggesting that, when this plan is fully implemented, no coins need be involved at all!
This doesn't have to affect the Registry because, as I understand it, Registry collections are scored based upon what is printed on the label - and the label will still be visible.
Now, a couple things, the fund would be better since you wouldn't have to create opaque holders and the coins inside would still be visible, so that when they do reenter the marketplace if the buyer is concerned with eye appeal they will be able to verify it.
Second, I would assume the shares woudn't be redeemable for physical peace dollars, just as SPDR's GLD etf isn't redeemable for physical gold. Having this ability will allow the fund to leverage up and issue more shares then physical Peace Dollars owned, thus creating greater liquidity, but also weakening the fund.
Just my thoughts.
Nick
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>The idea is not without merit. It would probably have to be done with the structure mentioned by roadrunner. A warehouse to house the physical coins and shares issued to willing buyers, after which the shares can be freely traded as all shares are identical. While 64.9's are worth more then 64.1's, assuming a normal distribution, an average 64 price could be obtained and would be allowed to fluctuate as prices (using prices from any index you want, pcgs, greysheet, ngc, etc) fluctuate. As funds are added, 64 Peace dollars would be pulled from the market to the physical warehouse, and as prices drop physical Peace dollars would be sold to the market to raise the cash. The problems you would run into (at least from my perspective) are the same problems that gold backed etf's have. There is a limited supply available and theoretically there is limited demand, thus the fund would be susceptible to mass sell offs (or even complete failures in liquidity), or extreme run ups (think Dutch tulips), which typically lead to mass failures.
Now, a couple things, the fund would be better since you wouldn't have to create opaque holders and the coins inside would still be visible, so that when they do reenter the marketplace if the buyer is concerned with eye appeal they will be able to verify it.
Second, I would assume the shares woudn't be redeemable for physical peace dollars, just as SPDR's GLD etf isn't redeemable for physical gold. Having this ability will allow the fund to leverage up and issue more shares then physical Peace Dollars owned, thus creating greater liquidity, but also weakening the fund.
Just my thoughts.
Nick >>
They need to stop teaching about Dutch tulips in college...
--Franz Kafka
<< <i>If opaque slabs were to tone (or tarnish, you choose), would they likely increase or decrease in value? Also, could they be made of asbestos so that skillets might still be used by coin . . . ummm . . . enhancers? >>
Sure! Why not? As long as the coin remains invisible.
Not really looking for much these days but if I were, it might be a toner.
Is it just me, or does that icon look like an ear?
<< <i>If opaque slabs were to tone (or tarnish, you choose), would they likely increase or decrease in value? Also, could they be made of asbestos so that skillets might still be used by coin . . . ummm . . . enhancers? >>
In an environmentally controlled storage facility these problems will be much reduced.
<< <i>RoadRunner's twist makes it very workable. No need to change slabs or anything. Just trade the certs. Shipping is cheaper, heck it could even be free using some email based system. Security is cheaper because all coins are stored in the trading company's vault. Prices would be sight unseen prices so the coins would likely be the low end coins for the grade, but so what? >>
Everyone would have dumped all their MS63/64 Morgan and Peace dollars a couple months ago!
It might work for the "investors" though I doubt many coin collectors would buy into it. I take on board the comic slabbing similarity BUT you can still see the outside of the comic and show it off to your friends even if you can't read it. I wonder how many comic collectors would buy them slabbed if they couldn't see the comic through the slab.
<< <i>One of the areas of the hobby that could generate a lot of revenue is 'sight-unseen' trading. That is, making coins fungible objects where any MS63 1922 Peace Dollar is interchangeable with any other MS63 1922 Peace Dollar. This would allow 'stock exchange' style trading of coins, and possibly the development of derivative financial instruments such as coin futures.
Standing in the way of this idea is the current transparent nature of slabs. You can actually SEE the coin inside the slab! And some, even at the same grade, are better than others!
To expedite sight-unseen trading I suggest that all future slabs be made opaque, so you can see the label clearly, but you CANNOT see the coin inside the slab.
I think this would help a lot.
Your comments please? >>
Too many mimosas at Sunday brunch can be hazardous to your health......
<< <i>RoadRunner's twist makes it very workable. No need to change slabs or anything. Just trade the certs. Shipping is cheaper, heck it could even be free using some email based system. Security is cheaper because all coins are stored in the trading company's vault. Prices would be sight unseen prices so the coins would likely be the low end coins for the grade, but so what? >>
I would be concerned about regulatory issues, but I haven't really researched that.
Also, if we do set up a purely paper based exchange, we could run it for ANY coin (perhaps using the PCGS pop reports as a guide to what exists. Or do we have to worry about if the coin exists or not?)
We could call it the Syndicate.
<< <i>
<< <i>RoadRunner's twist makes it very workable. No need to change slabs or anything. Just trade the certs. Shipping is cheaper, heck it could even be free using some email based system. Security is cheaper because all coins are stored in the trading company's vault. Prices would be sight unseen prices so the coins would likely be the low end coins for the grade, but so what? >>
I would be concerned about regulatory issues, but I haven't really researched that.
Also, if we do set up a purely paper based exchange, we could run it for ANY coin (perhaps using the PCGS pop reports as a guide to what exists. Or do we have to worry about if the coin exists or not?) >>
Aliens, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, etc., don't exist, but people still make money off their non-existence... why not coins?
<< <i>Could a group of well-healed dealers and collectors form a syndicate to do this?
We could call it the Syndicate. >>
Well, the posters to this Board collaboratively developed this idea, so why not? I guess we all sort of collectively gave the idea away for free. Who will follow up, make a business plan, get a couple of investors on board and get it rolling? Waiting for PMs....
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.