Bochiman: I am not looking for support of a purchase made or potential purchase at all. What is great about CAC is that they will BUY any coin they sticker at a fair market value. Can you say the same about PCGS/NGC/ANACS? No. So frankly, there is such minimal risk involved, that I dont need people to rally around and support me. People can go on buying how they wish, and I will go on how I wish. But I can bet you at the end of the day,the collections will look very different.
I do not need anyone to support me in my buying decisions.
And just to be clear, I do not like ALL coins that are stickered. Case in point is that 1793 Half cent you sold to Mark which in turn did sticker.
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i> just find it telling and limited and when I see a post like that, I can almost smell the fear in the poster >>
Perhaps his fear is justified. The bourse is a shark infested sea. PCGS provides collectors with a shark cage on the bourse. JA checks out the cage for rusty bars that sharks can break through. So do better dealers, and you will pay up to buy from them in many cases. Some people want that comfort. I see nothing wrong with it.
Jump into the shark infested waters, if you dare. Ignorance is bilss until you discover that someone just had you for lunch.
I do not need anyone to support me in my buying decisions.
At this stage in collecting, if I am spending a significant amount on a coin, I want it either to be stickered, or sold on the contingency that I will buy it only if it does sticker.
The way I read it, you do need the CAC to support you in buying decisions...not that there's anything wrong with it.
All of this is rather interesting. For me, in the end, the little green jelly bean is only important at sale time. Like it or not, the greater market is paying attention and realized auction prices reflect that. The market effect is similar to (but less important than) the price difference between raw and PCGS slabbed coins. When perusing through items at the auction companies, I often find myself wondering if the non-stickered coin got rejected or if it just wasn't submitted. My brain usually automatically assumes that I'm looking at a "C" coin unless the little sticker is there.
I don't suppose it's going away anytime soon.
Even if I implicitly trust my own grading skills and could buy whatever the heck I want (neither of which is true), the thought of an eventual future sale makes the sticker relevant. In my particular favorite series, strike is more important to me than luster or lack of hits. I realize that not everyone sees the series the way I do. I've passed up stickers to get what I want in terms of strike, but I'm dang sure aware that at sale time I'll pay a premium for having collected what I like instead of what the market likes.
I selected what I thought was the most attractive coin, and then showed it to my mentor, then to a dealer I implicitly trust. When I got a thumbs up from both of them, as well as an explanation why they liked the coin, I compared such to why I liked it, and then bought it.
How fortunate! Most dealers I've begged for a second opinion don't allow me to do so unless I buy the coin first.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. There are coin doctors and overgraders of coins out there. Not every collector has the time to fully learn grading. So they should be ripped off?
CAC was a response to the markets ills. The same people here who are moaning about probably were the same people who moaned about PCGS when it started.
Who says if you limit yourself to CAC coins your losing out? So many dealers out there can not grade. Even with advice you still may be buying a problem coin.
<< <i>Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. >>
Nonsense. If they weren't out to make money, they would be a non-profit organization, not a CORPORATION. I'm fine with the concept of stickers and educating collectors and charging money for services rendered, but all of the hypocrisy about motives makes me sick. It's mostly about $$$, people.
<< <i>"Sounds more like an investment than collecting to me." >>
I tend to agree and consider myself to be a collector/investor and vest-pocket dealer. The sticker does add a comfort level because I've only been active in the hobby for 4 years and have a lot to learn. I do submit to CAC but don't buy only-CAC coins (or those that guarantee sticking). I buy a lot of $100-$200 coins because I want them and the price is right. I know many won't sticker and don't care. When I buy $1000-$2000 coins? The sticker means a lot (unless it's generic gold) because that is a big purchase for me and I like the assurance that I'm not buying dreck or a problem piece (many of my purchases are online).
I really believe the CAC market volume will be built on Internet and sight-unseen trading. Many buyers appreciate the service and it's damn cheap to boot.
<< <i>Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. >>
Nonsense. If they weren't out to make money, they would be a non-profit organization, not a CORPORATION. I'm fine with the concept of stickers and educating collectors and charging money for services rendered, but all of the hypocrisy about motives makes me sick. It's mostly about $$$, people.
Edit: Spelling. >>
Im just curious, but how much do you think they can make charging $10 or $20 for stickering a coin when only about 30% of coins sticker? You realize they do not charge for those that do not sticker correct?
All coins kept in bank vaults. PCGS Registries Box of 20 SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Im just curious, but how much do you think they can make charging $10 or $20 for stickering a coin when only about 30% of coins sticker? You realize they do not charge for those that do not sticker correct? >>
What many folks still fail to understand is...... sure they don't make much off the sticker process. But they buy and sell and I suspect that's what they make their money off of. Not a bad concept, put your mark on coins you would buy, buy from who offers to you and probably auctions as well.
From CAC site.....
<< <i> It also has purchased more than $175 million worth of coins. >>
You think they just keep those coins for storage?
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
<< <i>Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. >>
Nonsense. If they weren't out to make money, they would be a non-profit organization, not a CORPORATION. I'm fine with the concept of stickers and educating collectors and charging money for services rendered, but all of the hypocrisy about motives makes me sick. It's mostly about $$$, people.
Edit: Spelling. >>
Im just curious, but how much do you think they can make charging $10 or $20 for stickering a coin when only about 30% of coins sticker? You realize they do not charge for those that do not sticker correct? >>
Ankur, where are you getting the 30% number from? JA told me the number was in the 40's last I asked him. Granted, that was awhile ago but to get down to 30% doesn't seem feasible.
I did not know that there was no charge for coins that don't sticker. MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Ankur, actually the last reported sticker rate reported by CAC was 47%.
From the CAC website---
<Since opening for business in late 2007, CAC has received more than 144,000 submissions from member dealers and collectors, and has awarded green stickers to just over 68,000 of these>
That was from May 2010. So there is no way the sticker rate could be at 30%. MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. >>
Nonsense. If they weren't out to make money, they would be a non-profit organization, not a CORPORATION. I'm fine with the concept of stickers and educating collectors and charging money for services rendered, but all of the hypocrisy about motives makes me sick. It's mostly about $$$, people.
Edit: Spelling. >>
Im just curious, but how much do you think they can make charging $10 or $20 for stickering a coin when only about 30% of coins sticker? You realize they do not charge for those that do not sticker correct? >>
I'd answer your questions if they had anything to do with my point. If you want a real education, why don't you call them and ask to see their books? Since they're not about the money, I'm sure they wouldn't mind.
I'll take my collection with its CAC stickers-approved by JA and my dealer vs anyones anyday. I know when I go to sell, demand will be there and the quality will not be questioned.
At least with CAC you will not be buying doctored coins. If PCGS and NGC weren't such targets, CAC probably would not exist.
In all fairness to JA, I think CAC is more a labor of love to him than anything else. The guy doesn't need the money and he has nothing to prove to anyone.
That being said, for what I collect, I find the green sticker to be for the most part a rubber stamp for PCGS grading standards. I really don't pay much attention to it, and with the exception of a series where I don't see many of them (like Bust $s), would not pay a premium for a stickered coin.
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i> I recently returned a coin that was in a PCGS holder, but when I showed it to JA, I was told it was blatant AT. >>
Interesting that JA can detect AT through the slab when 3 or 4 PCGS graders examined the coin outside of the slab. His business model is based on raising doubt about the accuracy of his former employers. >>
My thoughts as well. >>
A few years ago, according to HRH, PCGS switched to a more stringent policy of 'if we're not sure it's NT, we won't slab it'. This was a change from 'if we're not sure that it's AT, we will slab it'. Do you really want to collect in that middle range between those two policies? I sure don't...
IMO, CAC loses money on the stickering process. CAC makes money on making a market it coins it has stickered. Anyone who believes a company is rolling in the dough over a small sticker fee when it doesn't charge for rejects just doesn't understand business. Take a look at PCGS's books [public corporation] - do you think that PCGS would turn a profit if it didn't charge for the coins it rejects? NO WAY!
I won't pass on a nice piece because it isn't stickered, its all about the eye appeal. But I know just how you feel and that sticker is just a little bit of a hedge.
All that matters to me when I buy a slabbed coin is whether I would sticker it myself! If you can't grade well enough to distinguish a PQ coin from a problem coin that might be AT, what are you even doing buying 4-figure or 5-figure coins? That being said, I still prefer PCGS/CAC coins because they are much easier to sell when the time comes. The liquidity is a bonus.
Everyone knows or should know that the ANA's 6th Edition of Grading Standards was just the beginning of gradeflation. MS63 graded coins became MS65, AU58 became MS63, XF45 became AU58. This confused the hades out of everyone! The main reason the CAC came about. Which coins were graded by today's standards and no-one really wanted those new standards but here we are, all duped out (well, most are) with all this "strong for the grade" talk. Carry on!
Oh.......and it was all brought on by all of us.....the demand for more collectable, higher certifiable material....without regards to what the coin actually graded to the earlier standards.......the amount of detail on a coin. Doesn't matter any more, it's all about eye appeal!
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>Everyone knows or should know that the ANA's 6th Edition of Grading Standards was just the beginning of gradeflation. MS63 graded coins became MS65, AU58 became MS63, XF45 became AU58. This confused the hades out of everyone! The main reason the CAC came about. Which coins were graded by today's standards and no-one really wanted those new standards but here we are, all duped out (well, most are) with all this "strong for the grade" talk. Carry on!
Oh.......and it was all brought on by all of us.....the demand for more collectable, higher certifiable material....without regards to what the coin actually graded to the earlier standards.......the amount of detail on a coin. Doesn't matter any more, it's all about eye appeal! >>
I wasn't aware the ANA had anything to do with PCGS or NGC grading standards. They are just a 3rd entity with yet another set of standards. ANA was relevant to some extent prior to 1986-1987 but only on a small scale. In my mind grading standards started to shift in the 1995-1998 time frame as a way to get the coin market moving again. I would think it was dealer's who would have been pushing for looser standards rather than collectors. NGC was offering a special regrade offer to dealers that was essentially a no lose situation. One of my friends who took advantage of that offer in the 1997-2000 period averaged about 70% upgrades on the coins sent back in. And let's not forget that the TPG's were increasing revenues by seeing the same coins for a 2nd time. This shift seemed to coincide with the lift that the Pittman and Eliasberg sales gave the market. And the coins from those collections were often rewarded with some pretty high grades. I don't believe anyone was duped as it was pretty obvious what was going on. The shift was more like a slide and kept on rolling up to around 2006-2007. Fwiw I think CAC came about primarily because one particular TPG slipped a long ways.
I was quite happy collecting rarer date MS65 seated coins in the 1980's and 1990's because the MS66's and higher basically didn't exist. It certainly wasn't me that was asking for looser standards so I could own some "MS66 and MS67" rare date seated quarters and dimes.
I posted somewhere here in 2006 or 7, the ANA and PCGS standards before and after, the changes made in 2005 but can't find it. The files in my Microsoft word were lost as well when my computer crashed and assess to those files were denied. I could find the data on the internet again but I don't really have to prove my point as anyone can do the same if they choose. There are a couple of articles available for anyone's perusal concerning the CAC's direct response to the changes ANA made to their grading standards but they are their opinions as well. But the subject of gradeflation has come up many times on these boards over the years and their opinions as well have influenced mine. Anyone can believe whatever they want but the only way to collect the very best of any series (in any grade) is through the viewing and study of many coins. I'm certain you know this as well
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>This is my opinion [learned though it might be]:
IMO, CAC loses money on the stickering process. CAC makes money on making a market it coins it has stickered. Anyone who believes a company is rolling in the dough over a small sticker fee when it doesn't charge for rejects just doesn't understand business. Take a look at PCGS's books [public corporation] - do you think that PCGS would turn a profit if it didn't charge for the coins it rejects? NO WAY! >>
Bruce, it is now my understanding that CAC charges dealers for rejects but not collectors. Is this correct? Ankur threw me for a loop when he said that there wasn't a charge for a reject. I'm guessing the majority of submissions are from dealers. MJ
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>I wouldn't buy an expensive gold coin without a sticker. I hear too many putty and laser horror stories from pretty astute collectors and dealers to convince me otherwise. But, maybe that's just me. Then again I don't collect gold as a prime focus so maybe I do need my hand held at that rodeo. I know when I do buy a Pan Pac Octagonal or St Gauden's High Relief piece it will have to be stickered.
In my small area of expertise I feel confident enough to buy sans sticker on higher priced items. MJ >>
Me too,agree with you MJ.
Great coins are not cheap,and cheap coins are not great!
Comments
I do not need anyone to support me in my buying decisions.
And just to be clear, I do not like ALL coins that are stickered. Case in point is that 1793 Half cent you sold to Mark which in turn did sticker.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>... What is great about CAC is that they will BUY any coin they sticker at their offer price. ... >>
There, fixed it for you.
<< <i> just find it telling and limited and when I see a post like that, I can almost smell the fear in the poster >>
Perhaps his fear is justified. The bourse is a shark infested sea. PCGS provides collectors with a shark cage on the bourse. JA checks out the cage for rusty bars that sharks can break through. So do better dealers, and you will pay up to buy from them in many cases. Some people want that comfort. I see nothing wrong with it.
Jump into the shark infested waters, if you dare. Ignorance is bilss until you discover that someone just had you for lunch.
CG
gem enough. The marker has been moved higher on the quality post.
Camelot
At this stage in collecting, if I am spending a significant amount on a coin, I want it either to be stickered, or sold on the contingency that I will buy it only if it does sticker.
The way I read it, you do need the CAC to support you in buying decisions...not that there's anything wrong with it.
I don't suppose it's going away anytime soon.
Even if I implicitly trust my own grading skills and could buy whatever the heck I want (neither of which is true), the thought of an eventual future sale makes the sticker relevant. In my particular favorite series, strike is more important to me than luster or lack of hits. I realize that not everyone sees the series the way I do. I've passed up stickers to get what I want in terms of strike, but I'm dang sure aware that at sale time I'll pay a premium for having collected what I like instead of what the market likes.
How fortunate! Most dealers I've begged for a second opinion don't allow me to do so unless I buy the coin first.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Like pop tops for your registry sets! (not directed at roadrunner)
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
why you do something or do not do something. Even though the
market place, as a whole, has placed a premium on the weeny beany,
some folks do not require such and some folks, like me, sleep better at
night knowing that my coins are all PCGS and approved..Nice thing about
coin collecting, Its your money, your collection and so you can get to do it
YOUR WAY!
Camelot
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
CAC was a response to the markets ills. The same people here who are moaning about probably were the same people who moaned about PCGS when it started.
Who says if you limit yourself to CAC coins your losing out? So many dealers out there can not grade. Even with advice you still may be buying a problem coin.
<< <i>Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. >>
Nonsense. If they weren't out to make money, they would be a non-profit organization,
not a CORPORATION. I'm fine with the concept of stickers and educating collectors and
charging money for services rendered, but all of the hypocrisy about motives makes me
sick. It's mostly about $$$, people.
Edit: Spelling.
<< <i>"Sounds more like an investment than collecting to me." >>
I tend to agree and consider myself to be a collector/investor and vest-pocket dealer. The sticker does add a comfort level because I've only been active in the hobby for 4 years and have a lot to learn. I do submit to CAC but don't buy only-CAC coins (or those that guarantee sticking). I buy a lot of $100-$200 coins because I want them and the price is right. I know many won't sticker and don't care. When I buy $1000-$2000 coins? The sticker means a lot (unless it's generic gold) because that is a big purchase for me and I like the assurance that I'm not buying dreck or a problem piece (many of my purchases are online).
I really believe the CAC market volume will be built on Internet and sight-unseen trading. Many buyers appreciate the service and it's damn cheap to boot.
EDIT: Grammer/spelling
<< <i>
<< <i>Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. >>
Nonsense. If they weren't out to make money, they would be a non-profit organization,
not a CORPORATION. I'm fine with the concept of stickers and educating collectors and
charging money for services rendered, but all of the hypocrisy about motives makes me
sick. It's mostly about $$$, people.
Edit: Spelling. >>
Im just curious, but how much do you think they can make charging $10 or $20 for stickering a coin when only about 30% of coins sticker? You realize they do not charge for those that do not sticker correct?
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>Im just curious, but how much do you think they can make charging $10 or $20 for stickering a coin when only about 30% of coins sticker? You realize they do not charge for those that do not sticker correct? >>
What many folks still fail to understand is...... sure they don't make much off the sticker process. But they buy and sell and I suspect that's what they make their money off of. Not a bad concept, put your mark on coins you would buy, buy from who offers to you and probably auctions as well.
From CAC site.....
<< <i> It also has purchased more than $175 million worth of coins. >>
You think they just keep those coins for storage?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. >>
Nonsense. If they weren't out to make money, they would be a non-profit organization,
not a CORPORATION. I'm fine with the concept of stickers and educating collectors and
charging money for services rendered, but all of the hypocrisy about motives makes me
sick. It's mostly about $$$, people.
Edit: Spelling. >>
Im just curious, but how much do you think they can make charging $10 or $20 for stickering a coin when only about 30% of coins sticker? You realize they do not charge for those that do not sticker correct? >>
Ankur, where are you getting the 30% number from? JA told me the number was in the 40's last I asked him. Granted, that was awhile ago but to get down to 30% doesn't seem feasible.
I did not know that there was no charge for coins that don't sticker. MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
From the CAC website---
<Since opening for business in late 2007, CAC has received more than 144,000 submissions from member dealers and collectors, and has awarded green stickers to just over 68,000 of these>
That was from May 2010. So there is no way the sticker rate could be at 30%. MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Everyone is quick to forget why CAC exists. They are not out ot make money. >>
Nonsense. If they weren't out to make money, they would be a non-profit organization,
not a CORPORATION. I'm fine with the concept of stickers and educating collectors and
charging money for services rendered, but all of the hypocrisy about motives makes me
sick. It's mostly about $$$, people.
Edit: Spelling. >>
Im just curious, but how much do you think they can make charging $10 or $20 for stickering a coin when only about 30% of coins sticker? You realize they do not charge for those that do not sticker correct? >>
I'd answer your questions if they had anything to do with my point. If you want a real
education, why don't you call them and ask to see their books? Since they're not about
the money, I'm sure they wouldn't mind.
At least with CAC you will not be buying doctored coins. If PCGS and NGC weren't such targets, CAC probably would not exist.
That being said, for what I collect, I find the green sticker to be for the most part a rubber stamp for PCGS grading standards. I really don't pay much attention to it, and with the exception of a series where I don't see many of them (like Bust $s), would not pay a premium for a stickered coin.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> I recently returned a coin that was in a PCGS holder, but when I showed it to JA, I was told it was blatant AT. >>
Interesting that JA can detect AT through the slab when 3 or 4 PCGS graders examined the coin outside of the slab. His business model
is based on raising doubt about the accuracy of his former employers. >>
My thoughts as well. >>
A few years ago, according to HRH, PCGS switched to a more stringent policy of 'if we're not sure it's NT, we won't slab it'. This was a change from 'if we're not sure that it's AT, we will slab it'. Do you really want to collect in that middle range between those two policies? I sure don't...
IMO, CAC loses money on the stickering process. CAC makes money on making a market it coins it has stickered. Anyone who believes a company is rolling in the dough over a small sticker fee when it doesn't charge for rejects just doesn't understand business. Take a look at PCGS's books [public corporation] - do you think that PCGS would turn a profit if it didn't charge for the coins it rejects? NO WAY!
Oh.......and it was all brought on by all of us.....the demand for more collectable, higher certifiable material....without regards to what the coin actually graded to the earlier standards.......the amount of detail on a coin. Doesn't matter any more, it's all about eye appeal!
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>Everyone knows or should know that the ANA's 6th Edition of Grading Standards was just the beginning of gradeflation. MS63 graded coins became MS65, AU58 became MS63, XF45 became AU58. This confused the hades out of everyone! The main reason the CAC came about. Which coins were graded by today's standards and no-one really wanted those new standards but here we are, all duped out (well, most are) with all this "strong for the grade" talk. Carry on!
Oh.......and it was all brought on by all of us.....the demand for more collectable, higher certifiable material....without regards to what the coin actually graded to the earlier standards.......the amount of detail on a coin. Doesn't matter any more, it's all about eye appeal! >>
I wasn't aware the ANA had anything to do with PCGS or NGC grading standards. They are just a 3rd entity with yet another set of standards. ANA was relevant to some extent
prior to 1986-1987 but only on a small scale. In my mind grading standards started to shift in the 1995-1998 time frame as a way to get the coin market moving again. I would
think it was dealer's who would have been pushing for looser standards rather than collectors. NGC was offering a special regrade offer to dealers that was essentially a no lose
situation. One of my friends who took advantage of that offer in the 1997-2000 period averaged about 70% upgrades on the coins sent back in. And let's not forget that the TPG's
were increasing revenues by seeing the same coins for a 2nd time. This shift seemed to coincide with the lift that the Pittman and Eliasberg sales gave the market. And the coins
from those collections were often rewarded with some pretty high grades. I don't believe anyone was duped as it was pretty obvious what was going on. The shift was more like
a slide and kept on rolling up to around 2006-2007. Fwiw I think CAC came about primarily because one particular TPG slipped a long ways.
I was quite happy collecting rarer date MS65 seated coins in the 1980's and 1990's because the MS66's and higher basically didn't exist. It certainly wasn't me that was asking for
looser standards so I could own some "MS66 and MS67" rare date seated quarters and dimes.
roadrunner
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>This is my opinion [learned though it might be]:
IMO, CAC loses money on the stickering process. CAC makes money on making a market it coins it has stickered. Anyone who believes a company is rolling in the dough over a small sticker fee when it doesn't charge for rejects just doesn't understand business. Take a look at PCGS's books [public corporation] - do you think that PCGS would turn a profit if it didn't charge for the coins it rejects? NO WAY! >>
Bruce, it is now my understanding that CAC charges dealers for rejects but not collectors. Is this correct? Ankur threw me for a loop when he said that there wasn't a charge for a reject. I'm guessing the majority of submissions are from dealers. MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I'm quite fine on using my own judgement.
I'm certainly not paying up for a sticker.
Camelot
<< <i>I wouldn't buy an expensive gold coin without a sticker. I hear too many putty and laser horror stories from pretty astute collectors and dealers to convince me otherwise. But, maybe that's just me. Then again I don't collect gold as a prime focus so maybe I do need my hand held at that rodeo. I know when I do buy a Pan Pac Octagonal or St Gauden's High Relief piece it will have to be stickered.
In my small area of expertise I feel confident enough to buy sans sticker on higher priced items. MJ >>
Me too,agree with you MJ.
...you know this whole discussion can also be viewed from the OTHER end, and the question rewritten as..
At this stage of collecting, I am hesitant to sell pricey coins unless Ive ran them through the sticker factory first.
<< <i>collector/submitter members with CAC dont pay for 'rejects'.
...you know this whole discussion can also be viewed from the OTHER end, and the question rewritten as..
At this stage of collecting, I am hesitant to sell pricey coins unless Ive ran them through the sticker factory first. >>
I doubt a dealer would care if a coin sells with or without!
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!