I like how Bill Jones summarized this topic. The only people benefiting will be those who deal only in those coins approved/certified to be AAA prime unmolested. Holders of NGC coins over the past 4 years got a nice slap in the face because the market has determined they are not as worthy as they once were....including the good coins. This has eliminated a big chunk of available to coins to many buyers at all levels. They won't buy NGC just because others aren't. And I can't blame them one bit. It has nothing to do with the coin. The next step would be to eliminate another batch of coins that are thought to be "molested" in some way (ie dipping, fingerprints, spots, slight env damage, planchet streaks, rolling marks, ejection marks, deadish luster, too thick toning, etc.).
<< <i>Ideally, we will eliminate from consideration for "worthyness" all coins except the ones we're selling >>
That 's not my approach at all. I don't believe in dumping on someone else's market unless they are out to cheat people.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
<< <i>Rather than wasting our time debating unrealistic ideas like forcing the grading services to do anything, why no focus our energy on something useful and realistic. Why not focus on educating ourselves and others on what to for in quality material and how to detect doctored and worked on coins.
That is a good start. However, if we're going to be realistic, we have to accept that if a coin is doctored so well that it slips past a TPG, it can probably slip by a lot of "educated" collectors. >>
Well playing devils advocate, if it is so good that the TPG can't tell (especially with the sniffer) , a knowledgable dealer cant tell and a seasoned collector can't tell then what is wrong with the coin? In this case I am not referring to any of the "big sins" of adding/moving metal. I am referring to dipping, expedited natural toning and the like. >>
Isn't that like saying "If a coin is counterfeit but it's so good that no one can tell that it's a counterfeit, does it matter?" >>
If we collect coins because of the history embedded within the metal, then it's a resounding no. A coin that has been dipped or artificially toned still carries the history, just sans tarnish or with accelerated tarnish. A fake coin on the other hand does not carry the history it claims to have, since it was struck yesterday.
<< <i>As a practical matter, if you have been in the hobby for any length of time and have some contacts, you have a good idea of who the coin doctors are. Furthermore, you can probably spot an artificially toned coin, unless it's a RD copper. And if it's a RD copper, if it's not in an old holder, I wouldn't buy it anyway. >>
Yes, but this proposal to red flag any coin that has ever been dipped (not cleaned) is over the top. And added to that is the fact that some experts might disagree as whether or not a re-toned coin ever was dipped. >>
Bill, it's not over the top; it just doesn't make any sense. If they are going to do this, they'd have to flag 90% of the Gem and supergrade SLQs, Walkers, and Mercs. Let's face it, with few exceptions, any bright white Unc. type coin which is 150 years old has been dipped. Are they going to tag these coins too?
Re your comments about re-toned coins, what are they going to do, ding coins that have been in a Wayte Raymond album for fifty years?
"Vou invadir o Nordeste, "Seu cabra da peste, "Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>Bill, it's not over the top; it's plain stupid. >>
try to be a little more diplomatic because I've already been on these guy's S-list in the past.
Their marketing strategy is clearly different than my collecting tastes. Even the purchase of the finest graded 1794 silver dollar is an indication of that. The 1794 dollar has a great history, and I would not mind owning one given that it was the first silver coin issued for general circulation from the first U.S. mint. Still, it is not a super rare coin overall with 125 to 150 examples known. The Legend philosophy seems to be that preservation trumps rarity in all cases.
The 1802 half dime is rarer with about 35 to 40 known, and is much harder to find in high grade. If fact the finest examples graded are in AU-55. There is only one 1822 half eagle available to collectors because the other two examples are now impounded in museums. Yet when I suggested that 1822 half eagle might rival their 1794 dollar at auction, my proposal was blown off because the finest known example "only" grades EF-45. And, of course the unique 1870-S Three Dollar Gold Piece is totally out of the running because it was formally used as jewelry.
It is just a difference in perspective, and I would hope that it would stay that way, and not turn into a contest to see if they can invalidate a lot of coins to conform to their marketing plan. I ask for peaceful co-existence. They can do their thing; I would like to do mine.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Bill, ask about the unique 1870-s half dime (formerly an AU but today MS63) and I think you'll get a different or conflicting answer on that subject.
As far as educating coin consumers to keep ahead of the doctoring and other games? That's almost impossible, even for full time dealers. For 50 year collectors like myself, I don't consider it a realistic task. That's why the grading problem was supposed to be solved in 1986. The only realistic solution is to become essentially a full time dealer or devotee to doctoring tactics or to avoid those coins altogether that have any remote possibility of being doctored. Or better yet, just avoid all coins where a slight difference in grade or originality makes a large difference in price. This is part of the reason why there is so much attention being paid to stickered PCGS original gem coins. But anything that falls short of that standard is under far less demand. It would be interesting to see the 1838 ND quarter in MS68 get on the "crap" list because it has been dipped. It's probably the finest condition pre-1873 mint state seated quarter in existence, and it's dipped...plus stickered as well. What to do? Put a scarlet "A" on the coin and place this on a "do not buy" list for well-heeled buyers? If such a thing happened this magnificent coin would probably drop 30% in price overnight. Why screw around with a coin on a "hit list" when there are others on a "no problems" list? Is an investor going to buy a AAA rated security or one rated BBB?
The Legend philosophy seems to be that preservation trumps rarity in all cases.
That's silly. They may value quality more than you do, but they certainly appreciate rarity as well. (Otherwise, their inventory would be loaded with PR70 modern crap.)
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic. Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Roadrunner, to your comment about it being almost impossible to teach customers is right. However it is possible to partner with your clients and teach but have them learn on their own as well. On a regular basis "investor" types come into our store talking about rare coins and bullion. The first question I ask them if they are looking to just put money in something or actually start a hobby and learn about coins. Almost invariably people choose bullion based on that. The ones that do head to rare coins take the time and work with us to learn everything they can both from us and from other resources. They spend big money on coins but know what they are getting and they understand the rarity and value. Not just because I say so but because they can do the research on their own. If I chose to, I could lead the bullion people to buy rare coins and I can definitely see several of them buying high 5 and 6 figure coins. However, I feel it is irresponsible of a dealer to lead customers to buy something they don't understand. I think this is where the problem lies. Some dealers want coins to be a low risk super liquid asset that they can sell to their wealthy clients and profit greatly. To get the market to this place, it would have to be at the expense of the other 99% of collectors. I gladly sacrifice some high profit sales of rare coins and putting people into bullion if it is in the best interest of the customer. Clearly many do not believe in that.
It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level.
<< <i>The Legend philosophy seems to be that preservation trumps rarity in all cases.
That's silly. They may value quality more than you do, but they certainly appreciate rarity as well. (Otherwise, their inventory would be loaded with PR70 modern crap.) >>
No, I think Laura looked at that stuff and found out that she could not sell enough of of it to build a business around. Remember the warning post she put up three years ago or so?
Go look at her inventory. See how many early 19th century coins she has, very few. See how many rare dates she has, not many. Believe me I go to shows looking for this material, and Legend does not have it for the most part. It's all high grade, but no great or even minor rarities beyond condition rarity. That is their nitch. This is nothing wrong with nitches, but don't force the rest of us into them for the sake of condition rarity.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
However, I feel it is irresponsible of a dealer to lead customers to buy something they don't understand. I think this is where the problem lies.
I'm not so sure about that. Are stock brokers, car dealers and art dealers "irresponsible" to lead customers to buy? I don't think so. On the other hand, it may be irresponsible for the customers to buy something they don't understand, but that's not something the dealers need to be concerned with.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic. Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers.
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers. >>
if you , as well, admit that people have come to you after getting screwed for hundreds of thousands then this must not be uncommon.
Point is it happens.
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers. >>
if you , as well, admit that people have come to you after getting screwed for hundreds of thousands then this must not be uncommon.
Point is it happens. >>
Well the cases I am speaking of are cases of misrepresented value, not that there was something wrong with the coins. The coins were what they were they were just charged 2-3X what they are worth. I think TDN is referring to something else.
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers. >>
I think the people that know and care can get the message without the need for further detail.
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers. >>
I think the people that know and care can get the message without the need for further detail. >>
I can see several issues that a little more information would help with. Was this person a real collector or was it some wealthy person who was buying coins because someone told them it would be a good idea. If it is the latter the person should not have been buying rare coins in the first place. I have dealt with people who were burned and they learned from their mistakes and came back to the hobby. What was wrong with the coin? Was it a legitimately doctored coin that the TPG should have eaten or was it a coin that 99% of the hobby would have no issue with? Did they take it back to the dealer? What did the dealer say? You make some major claims and are refusing to support them.
<< <i>I think the people that know and care can get the message without the need for further detail. >>
So let's summarize. We have a "doctored" "dog" that for some reason is not eligible for grade guarantee. What kind of coin would that be? Sounds like what we are really talking about is a low-end coin for the grade w/QT that managed to get into a holder. Dealer overpaid and then buried client in it. And how is the ANA supposed to fix that?
Some very insightful replies that make valid points about the topic of coin doctors and their work.
It would be interesting to hear from forumites their opinions about the "doctored coins" if they were involved (as owner, as potential buyer, as auction house, as dealer to whom a coin has been consigned, etc.) in a situation where a $100,000+ coin appeared on the market that was of very high quality but had extremely negative eye appeal due to reasons that could be completely eliminated without damaging or altering the coin at all (i.e. it had developed a splotchy, milky haze; or it was somehow dropped into a fireplace and sat in ashes for a day; or it was found metal detecting and it had developed verdigis in the nooks and crannies of the devices, etc.).
Would anyone in this situation take the position that the coin should not be dipped, soaked or otherwise "conserved" to eliminate the negative eye appeal, remove the material that had accumulated on the coin and threatened to deteriorate it if not removed, and increase the "appeal" (and value) of same?
For anyone who would object to doing something to save the particular coin from long term/permanent damage, what is your rationale for taking this position?
Are there any collectors who are so intent on collecting coins (classic, not moderns) that are totally original that when you look at his/her collection all you see are ugly, but original, coins with negative eye appeal?
This is what drives Laura. I submit that until you have been there - as either victim or new mentor to the victim - you will never truly understand:
the colelctor is a surgeon who had been a collector ALL his life. he loves his coins. he looks at tham as often as he can. he never had the time to fully learn how to grade-because he was buying certified coins from a major name dealer. When I broke the news to him he was devasted. It wasn't the financal loss. It was how could this reputable dealer let him get screwed. How could the 3 rd party grading system fail so miserably?
If someone exits the "hobby" on the basis of a single bad transaction, then maybe they weren't really a coin collector at heart. More likely they were dabbling with an eye for profit.
EDIT: OK, I see there was a clarification above. Gee, pretty hard to believe that a lifelong collector "who loves coins" and obviously possesses high intelligence can find out so late in the game that they've been assembling [something horrible which we can't be privy to]. This person apparently never interacted with other collectors or dealers who might have brought problems to their attention during the course of this lifelong devotion to the hobby. Yep, sounds plausible to me...............
he colelctor is a surgeon who had been a collector ALL his life. he loves his coins. he looks at tham as often as he can. he never had the time to fully learn how to grade-because he was buying certified coins from a major name dealer. When I broke the news to him he was devasted. It wasn't the financal loss. It was how could this reputable dealer let him get screwed. How could the 3 rd party grading system fail so miserably?
If the TPG failed so miserably, I'm sure they'll make it right. And if they didn't fail so miserably, and if the coin isn't really that bad, just isn't great, what just happened?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic. Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>I think the people that know and care can get the message without the need for further detail. >>
So let's summarize. We have a "doctored" "dog" that for some reason is not eligible for grade guarantee. What kind of coin would that be? Sounds like what we are really talking about is a low-end coin for the grade w/QT that managed to get into a holder. Dealer overpaid and then buried client in it. And how is the ANA supposed to fix that? >>
That is a big problem. But the problem of mid range to higher end range coins getting a grade bump on multiple attempts is the biggest problem. I'd say at least 10X the problem of doctored coins. Those are the coins that the newbie collector or investor are more likely to run into. And this happens on big dollar coins too. The MS67 1839 no drapery half is a good example. It ended up being purchased for the Joe Thomas collection at the peak of the market for $400K+. When it was sold a few years later it fetched around MS65 money...around $140K to $175K as I recall. The coin was no better than MS65, only a 64 imo. It fetched what it was worth in the real market. Coin is not doctored. It lacked full mint luster in the fields and have quite a bit of high point friction/rubbing....not something you'd expect to see on a 67, 66, or even a 65 coin. I don't believe this situation was ever made right by the TPG along with other coins that were in that same collection. And I'm not sure why. Surely, someone must have mentioned to the owner at some point along the way that your 1839 half is a couple points shy of MS67.....or maybe not.
The ANA could take on doctoring and overgrading. But I don't think they have unlimited war chest needed to take on all the dealers' lawyers that will fight them tooth and nail. Even if ANA member lawyers worked for free the liability of losing such a fight could drain every dollar the ANA has, and might ever have.
<< <i>If someone exits the "hobby" on the basis of a single bad transaction, then maybe they weren't really a coin collector at heart. More likely they were dabbling with an eye for profit.
EDIT: OK, I see there was a clarification above. Gee, pretty hard to believe that a lifelong collector "who loves coins" and obviously possesses high intelligence can find out so late in the game that they've been assembling [something horrible which we can't be privy to]. This person apparently never interacted with other collectors or dealers who might have brought problems to their attention during the course of this lifelong devotion to the hobby. Gee, sounds plausible to me............... >>
<< <i>If someone exits the "hobby" on the basis of a single bad transaction, then maybe they weren't really a coin collector at heart. More likely they were dabbling with an eye for profit.
EDIT: OK, I see there was a clarification above. Gee, pretty hard to believe that a lifelong collector "who loves coins" and obviously possesses high intelligence can find out so late in the game that they've been assembling [something horrible which we can't be privy to]. This person apparently never interacted with other collectors or dealers who might have brought problems to their attention during the course of this lifelong devotion to the hobby. Gee, sounds plausible to me............... >>
/eyeroll >>
I see the rebuttal was every bit as substantive as the initial testimony......
<< <i>This is what drives Laura. I submit that until you have been there - as either victim or new mentor to the victim - you will never truly understand:
the colelctor is a surgeon who had been a collector ALL his life. he loves his coins. he looks at tham as often as he can. he never had the time to fully learn how to grade-because he was buying certified coins from a major name dealer. When I broke the news to him he was devasted. It wasn't the financal loss. It was how could this reputable dealer let him get screwed. How could the 3 rd party grading system fail so miserably?
Typos left in to verify authenticity. >>
as long as this type of thing occurs, it's not beating a dead horse. this horse is still up and running around healthy as ever.
<< <i>Wow , pretty offensive seeing as you know that it is absolutely not the case. >>
Obviously, my point was to have you take it down a notch, obviously TDN doesn't want to name names and you can't blame him so why push. Do you think outing someone's name in these times is prudent for anybody? >>
well, at some point the ANA will have to name names.
and back to my one word post from some time ago: Proof?
Hmmm. I was a busy coin collector at heart from 1974-1988 buying major coins at auction beginning in the late 1970's. In 1983 I paid $3,000 for a toner gem proof NM seated quarter from a leading New England dealer. The coin was magnificent to me. It sat proudly in my collection until 1988 when I had it graded along with my other key coins. NO GRADE - AT. That was a shock. It was a stark lesson in the look of AT coins that told me I still had a lot to learn then....as well as today. Ultimately, the coin got dipped and ended up looking horrendous with a grade of NGC PF62. It sold for around $450, the biggest % loss I ever took on a seated coin. And I could have made that same mistake 10 yrs later as well. Many times during the 1997-2007 market I cracked out MS seated coins that I felt were undergraded....only to get back an AT. Would these misses have been lessened using dealers to buy for me? I suspect it would have helped, though probably not eliminating the problem. Most of the coins sent to me by other dealers during that same period were often returned due to excessive rub, weak or missing luster, or too many marks for the grade. We rarely even got to consider whether the coin could be AT....lol. I'd say my return rate during the 1980's on choice/gem raw MS seated "on approval" coins was over 80%. In the 1990's maybe 50% on slabbed coins. In the 2000's somewhere between 50-70%. I can only imagine what a newbie collector would have been saddled with during those periods. A "lifelong" collector who never sells anything, can easily assemble a pile of swill that buries them. I've seen it more than a couple of times, most recently with my brother-in-law who had collected for around 20 yrs, rarely selling anything. I never knew he collected more expensive coins until he was forced to sell out in 2009. That was a shocker.
Roadrunner, that was a great post. It's true that an uninformed buyer (of anything!) can do a tremendous amount of financial damage to themselves, especially over a period of time. But assigning blame is a very tricky proposition. I tend to place most of it on the buyer who failed to become educated in something before sinking a considerable amount of capital into it.
<< <i>If someone exits the "hobby" on the basis of a single bad transaction, then maybe they weren't really a coin collector at heart. More likely they were dabbling with an eye for profit.
EDIT: OK, I see there was a clarification above. Gee, pretty hard to believe that a lifelong collector "who loves coins" and obviously possesses high intelligence can find out so late in the game that they've been assembling [something horrible which we can't be privy to]. This person apparently never interacted with other collectors or dealers who might have brought problems to their attention during the course of this lifelong devotion to the hobby. Gee, sounds plausible to me............... >>
/eyeroll >>
I see the rebuttal was every bit as substantive as the initial testimony......
>>
Sorry, but I don't feel the need to testify for you or GreenieJr. You are free to disagree, but kindly don't be rude about it.
<< <i>Roadrunner, that was a great post. It's true that an uninformed buyer (of anything!) can do a tremendous amount of financial damage to themselves, especially over a period of time. But assigning blame is a very tricky proposition. I tend to place most of it on the buyer who failed to become educated in something before sinking a considerable amount of capital into it. >>
It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal.
t seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable.
What exactly do you mean by "infrastructure"?
Do you think the bias is by design, or is it just a matter of survival of the fittest?
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic. Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>This is what drives Laura. I submit that until you have been there - as either victim or new mentor to the victim - you will never truly understand:
the colelctor is a surgeon who had been a collector ALL his life. he loves his coins. he looks at tham as often as he can. he never had the time to fully learn how to grade-because he was buying certified coins from a major name dealer. When I broke the news to him he was devasted. It wasn't the financal loss. It was how could this reputable dealer let him get screwed. How could the 3 rd party grading system fail so miserably?
Typos left in to verify authenticity. >>
Hard to believe that a 500k sale was lost due to earlier issues. This surgeon finally made it to the right place got crushed on prior SLABBED coins and now runs off?? Should have been a new chapter in his life, now way every coin in his collection was crap.
I have never believed in the ONE dealer theory to buy coins and i have never bought into the never sell a coin collecting. If you never sell a coin to me that would be more of a reason to bail than buying crap from one dealer. A true collector can stomach a loss on coins, an investor maybe not. Everyone that has collected more than 6 months should have there eyes wide open on what happens in this business. I have no issue with coins being worth less years down the road, my issue is when coins are only worth 25 cents on the dollar the week after the purchase. You can not control the future but a week later....
This same story told can be told a 100 times with different dealers and customers, the only difference is the value. Plus for everyone that feels his dealer shafted him, a lot more will be happy with the same dealer.
I say they guy was jerking you on the 500k coin cause he was in a win/win. He could sue the prior dealer, work with the grading companies, dump his entire collection and end up with ONE (1) KILLER coin to start with.
So what did he do with the 500k PLUS and his pile of .... ( I had to go with Lame since i could not find the eyeroll)
Mark NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!! working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
<< <i>It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal. >>
Couldn't the exact same thing be said of the art market, real estate, even the stock market to a certain extent? We all agree on legal protection for fraud and those protections exist in varying degrees depending on what you are buying. Our problem in the coin biz seems to be defining exactly where fraud begins. And that is only half the battle, after you agree on that you still have to deal with the enforcement side. And, even if you get past all that, you still can't protect people from themselves and making dumb buying decisions. So the ANA says, let's just focus on education instead. To be honest, there are worse ways to approach the problem.......
<< <i>Roadrunner, that was a great post. It's true that an uninformed buyer (of anything!) can do a tremendous amount of financial damage to themselves, especially over a period of time. But assigning blame is a very tricky proposition. I tend to place most of it on the buyer who failed to become educated in something before sinking a considerable amount of capital into it. >>
It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal. >>
In a nutshell: Knowledge is power, and power tends to "attract" money. So, no, I don't believe the playing field can really be leveled, because some parties will always be better informed, have stronger connections, etc.
<< <i>It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal. >>
Couldn't the exact same thing be said of the art market, real estate, even the stock market to a certain extent? We all agree on legal protection for fraud and those protections exist in varying degrees depending on what you are buying. Our problem in the coin biz seems to be defining exactly where fraud begins. And that is only half the battle, after you agree on that you still have to deal with the enforcement side. And, even if you get past all that, you still can't protect people from themselves and making dumb buying decisions. So the ANA says, let's just focus on education instead. To be honest, there are worse ways to approach the problem....... >>
+1
Trying to come up with true value of anything can be hard, throw in a salesperson that can sale ice to a eskimo....
Mark NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!! working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
<< <i>t seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable.
What exactly do you mean by "infrastructure"?
Do you think the bias is by design, or is it just a matter of survival of the fittest? >>
Infrastructure could be the sum of all organizations, companies, dealerships, auctioneers, clubs, journalists, etc. that provide services and goods to the numismatic consumer. I do not think it is by design.
Hard to believe that a 500k sale was lost due to earlier issues. This surgeon finally made it to the right place got crushed on prior SLABBED coins and now runs off?? Should have been a new chapter in his life, no way every coin in his collection was crap.
Here's a better example. The Osburn collection of approx 150 PF/MS seated halves that was sold at auction at the summer ANA sale in 2011. The breakdown of slabbed coins was 55% NGC and 45% PCGS. Of the coins listed only 3% of the NGC coins stickered, 38% for PCGS....combined sticker rate of 19%. I have to assume that all the coins were presented for stickering. Maybe they weren't. But the 13-1 ratio of PCGS to NGC stickering was very unusual imo. I don't know how such a ratio could have been achieved. It baffles me. The prices realized on these coins was very poor, and especially the 80 or so non-stickered NGC coins. The collection must have netted a few hundred thousand dollars which is serious money. So here was a collection assembled by a knowledgeable dealer,an insider in the seated coin trade, having access to a huge number of coins over many years. This was not newbie collector or investor. I don't know if the seller profited, or lost money on these coins, just that the prices realized were stunningly low for the assigned grades. How would a newbie have done purchasing from the same sources? I'd bet that some collectors considering building or just having started a seated coin set might look at these results and say, "if that's the best that an educated and experienced specialist dealer can do, why should I attempt it?"
I can't explain the results nor can I even state the grading proficiency of the owner since I've never worked with him before. I just know that the results achieved were not good over a multi-year period by a very seasoned dealer/collector. Not every coin in the collection was low end as I noted half a dozen or so coins out of the 150 that realized very strong or runaway prices. But the vast majority received very weak prices (ie low end money). I was shocked by the large number of coins realizing next grade down money. I can only assume that buyers felt the coins were 1 grade lower too.
<< <i>Sorry, but I don't feel the need to testify for you or GreenieJr. You are free to disagree, but kindly don't be rude about it. >>
With all due respect, you and your partner have shown a pattern of making vague statements that shine a negative light on other dealers, the grading services, numismatic professional organizations, etc. When anyone calls you out and asks for specifics, you invariably refuse to provide them. It gets rather tiresome.
Frankly, if I were a wealthy individual who knew nothing about coins, I would not be attracted to the hobby by most of what I read on your web site, in terms of either content or presentation. I'm quite sure you couldn't care less, and that's really fine. No need for a response.
<< <i>Roadrunner, that was a great post. It's true that an uninformed buyer (of anything!) can do a tremendous amount of financial damage to themselves, especially over a period of time. But assigning blame is a very tricky proposition. I tend to place most of it on the buyer who failed to become educated in something before sinking a considerable amount of capital into it. >>
It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal. >>
I agree with this. It seems like less knowledgable collectors often suffer losses in this hobby and the hobby-industrial-complex is structured to take advantage of this. It seems like there's a substantial, systemic interest in maintaining the status quo to the detriment of less knowledgable collectors. Voice advocating change are refreshing and welcome.
<< <i>With all due respect, you and your partner have shown a pattern of making vague statements that shine a negative light on other dealers, the grading services, numismatic professional organizations, etc. When anyone calls you out and asks for specifics, you invariably refuse to provide them. It gets rather tiresome. >>
I think there have been enough details that the discussion can be fairly interesting, much more so than simply avoiding the topic. Positive comments have been made about TGPs like our host, so this is not a systemic issue. Additionally, I do remember specifics being listed in the past with some lawyerly advice afterwards so I don't fault them on not naming dealers.
<< <i>t seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable.
What exactly do you mean by "infrastructure"?
Do you think the bias is by design, or is it just a matter of survival of the fittest? >>
Infrastructure could be the sum of all organizations, companies, dealerships, auctioneers, clubs, journalists, etc. that provide services and goods to the numismatic consumer. I do not think it is by design. >>
It may have originally not been by design.
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......
There are plenty of opportunities for a collector to avail his or herself at educational seminars at the local regional and national level to gain knowledge.
Also, I consider myself an experienced collector yet I still pay for a professionals eyeballs from time to time to look at coins for me or represent me at auction.
There are a certain few who get virtually all my business because of the trust that was built with me by these coin professionals.
I do not blame anyone but myself for mistakes I have made in the past
I manage money. I earn money. I save money . I give away money. I collect money. I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Comments
Holders of NGC coins over the past 4 years got a nice slap in the face because the market has determined they are not as worthy as they once were....including the good coins.
This has eliminated a big chunk of available to coins to many buyers at all levels. They won't buy NGC just because others aren't. And I can't blame them one bit. It has nothing
to do with the coin. The next step would be to eliminate another batch of coins that are thought to be "molested" in some way (ie dipping, fingerprints, spots, slight env damage,
planchet streaks, rolling marks, ejection marks, deadish luster, too thick toning, etc.).
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Ideally, we will eliminate from consideration for "worthyness" all coins except the ones we're selling
That 's not my approach at all. I don't believe in dumping on someone else's market unless they are out to cheat people.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Rather than wasting our time debating unrealistic ideas like forcing the grading services to do anything, why no focus our energy on something useful and realistic. Why not focus on educating ourselves and others on what to for in quality material and how to detect doctored and worked on coins.
That is a good start. However, if we're going to be realistic, we have to accept that if a coin is doctored so well that it slips past a TPG, it can probably slip by a lot of "educated" collectors. >>
Well playing devils advocate, if it is so good that the TPG can't tell (especially with the sniffer) , a knowledgable dealer cant tell and a seasoned collector can't tell then what is wrong with the coin? In this case I am not referring to any of the "big sins" of adding/moving metal. I am referring to dipping, expedited natural toning and the like. >>
Isn't that like saying "If a coin is counterfeit but it's so good that no one can tell that it's a counterfeit, does it matter?" >>
If we collect coins because of the history embedded within the metal, then it's a resounding no. A coin that has been dipped or artificially toned still carries the history, just sans tarnish or with accelerated tarnish. A fake coin on the other hand does not carry the history it claims to have, since it was struck yesterday.
<< <i>
<< <i>As a practical matter, if you have been in the hobby for any length of time and have some contacts, you have a good idea of who the coin doctors are. Furthermore, you can probably spot an artificially toned coin, unless it's a RD copper. And if it's a RD copper, if it's not in an old holder, I wouldn't buy it anyway. >>
Yes, but this proposal to red flag any coin that has ever been dipped (not cleaned) is over the top. And added to that is the fact that some experts might disagree as whether or not a re-toned coin ever was dipped. >>
Bill, it's not over the top; it just doesn't make any sense. If they are going to do this, they'd have to flag 90% of the Gem and supergrade SLQs, Walkers, and Mercs. Let's face it, with few exceptions, any bright white Unc. type coin which is 150 years old has been dipped. Are they going to tag these coins too?
Re your comments about re-toned coins, what are they going to do, ding coins that have been in a Wayte Raymond album for fifty years?
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>Bill, it's not over the top; it's plain stupid. >>
try to be a little more diplomatic because I've already been on these guy's S-list in the past.
Their marketing strategy is clearly different than my collecting tastes. Even the purchase of the finest graded 1794 silver dollar is an indication of that. The 1794 dollar has a great history, and I would not mind owning one given that it was the first silver coin issued for general circulation from the first U.S. mint. Still, it is not a super rare coin overall with 125 to 150 examples known. The Legend philosophy seems to be that preservation trumps rarity in all cases.
The 1802 half dime is rarer with about 35 to 40 known, and is much harder to find in high grade. If fact the finest examples graded are in AU-55. There is only one 1822 half eagle available to collectors because the other two examples are now impounded in museums. Yet when I suggested that 1822 half eagle might rival their 1794 dollar at auction, my proposal was blown off because the finest known example "only" grades EF-45. And, of course the unique 1870-S Three Dollar Gold Piece is totally out of the running because it was formally used as jewelry.
It is just a difference in perspective, and I would hope that it would stay that way, and not turn into a contest to see if they can invalidate a lot of coins to conform to their marketing plan. I ask for peaceful co-existence. They can do their thing; I would like to do mine.
As far as educating coin consumers to keep ahead of the doctoring and other games? That's almost impossible, even for full time dealers. For 50 year collectors like myself,
I don't consider it a realistic task. That's why the grading problem was supposed to be solved in 1986. The only realistic solution is to become essentially a full time dealer or
devotee to doctoring tactics or to avoid those coins altogether that have any remote possibility of being doctored. Or better yet, just avoid all coins where a slight difference in grade
or originality makes a large difference in price. This is part of the reason why there is so much attention being paid to stickered PCGS original gem coins. But anything that falls
short of that standard is under far less demand. It would be interesting to see the 1838 ND quarter in MS68 get on the "crap" list because it has been dipped. It's probably the finest
condition pre-1873 mint state seated quarter in existence, and it's dipped...plus stickered as well. What to do? Put a scarlet "A" on the coin and place this on a "do not buy" list for
well-heeled buyers? If such a thing happened this magnificent coin would probably drop 30% in price overnight. Why screw around with a coin on a "hit list" when there are others on
a "no problems" list? Is an investor going to buy a AAA rated security or one rated BBB?
That's silly. They may value quality more than you do, but they certainly appreciate rarity as well. (Otherwise, their inventory would be loaded with PR70 modern crap.)
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>The Legend philosophy seems to be that preservation trumps rarity in all cases.
That's silly. They may value quality more than you do, but they certainly appreciate rarity as well. (Otherwise, their inventory would be loaded with PR70 modern crap.) >>
No, I think Laura looked at that stuff and found out that she could not sell enough of of it to build a business around. Remember the warning post she put up three years ago or so?
Go look at her inventory. See how many early 19th century coins she has, very few. See how many rare dates she has, not many. Believe me I go to shows looking for this material, and Legend does not have it for the most part. It's all high grade, but no great or even minor rarities beyond condition rarity. That is their nitch. This is nothing wrong with nitches, but don't force the rest of us into them for the sake of condition rarity.
I'm not so sure about that. Are stock brokers, car dealers and art dealers "irresponsible" to lead customers to buy? I don't think so. On the other hand, it may be irresponsible for the customers to buy something they don't understand, but that's not something the dealers need to be concerned with.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers.
<< <i>
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers. >>
if you , as well, admit that people have come to you after getting screwed for hundreds of thousands then this must not be uncommon.
Point is it happens.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers. >>
if you , as well, admit that people have come to you after getting screwed for hundreds of thousands then this must not be uncommon.
Point is it happens. >>
Well the cases I am speaking of are cases of misrepresented value, not that there was something wrong with the coins. The coins were what they were they were just charged 2-3X what they are worth. I think TDN is referring to something else.
<< <i>
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers. >>
I think the people that know and care can get the message without the need for further detail.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It has less to do with wanting to make a sale in the short term and more to do with wanting to keep customers in the hobby long term. I can't count the number of times a Legend customer has shown us a coin purchased elsewhere that was doctored. Just recently, a $500k+ sale was lost and the customer is exiting the hobby because he found out his previous purchase from a very reputable dealer was a dog and he's going to lose significant money. Stuff like this just KILLS Laura on a visceral level. >>
Care to share the details of what the coins were that this person had and what was wrong with them? Just throwing out big numbers like that are meaningless without a little more details. I have have had people come in after getting screwed for 100s of thousands of dollars but for the most part it was telemarketer stuff. Please share otherwise they are just empty numbers. >>
I think the people that know and care can get the message without the need for further detail. >>
I can see several issues that a little more information would help with. Was this person a real collector or was it some wealthy person who was buying coins because someone told them it would be a good idea. If it is the latter the person should not have been buying rare coins in the first place. I have dealt with people who were burned and they learned from their mistakes and came back to the hobby. What was wrong with the coin? Was it a legitimately doctored coin that the TPG should have eaten or was it a coin that 99% of the hobby would have no issue with? Did they take it back to the dealer? What did the dealer say? You make some major claims and are refusing to support them.
<< <i>I think the people that know and care can get the message without the need for further detail. >>
So let's summarize. We have a "doctored" "dog" that for some reason is not eligible for grade guarantee. What kind of coin would that be? Sounds like what we are really talking about is a low-end coin for the grade w/QT that managed to get into a holder. Dealer overpaid and then buried client in it. And how is the ANA supposed to fix that?
Some very insightful replies that make valid points about the topic of coin doctors and their work.
It would be interesting to hear from forumites their opinions about the "doctored coins" if they were involved (as owner, as potential buyer, as auction house, as dealer to whom a coin has been consigned, etc.) in a situation where a $100,000+ coin appeared on the market that was of very high quality but had extremely negative eye appeal due to reasons that could be completely eliminated without damaging or altering the coin at all (i.e. it had developed a splotchy, milky haze; or it was somehow dropped into a fireplace and sat in ashes for a day; or it was found metal detecting and it had developed verdigis in the nooks and crannies of the devices, etc.).
Would anyone in this situation take the position that the coin should not be dipped, soaked or otherwise "conserved" to eliminate the negative eye appeal, remove the material that had accumulated on the coin and threatened to deteriorate it if not removed, and increase the "appeal" (and value) of same?
For anyone who would object to doing something to save the particular coin from long term/permanent damage, what is your rationale for taking this position?
Are there any collectors who are so intent on collecting coins (classic, not moderns) that are totally original that when you look at his/her collection all you see are ugly, but original, coins with negative eye appeal?
the colelctor is a surgeon who had been a collector ALL his life. he loves his coins. he looks at tham as often as he can. he never had the time to fully learn how to grade-because he was buying certified coins from a major name dealer. When I broke the news to him he was devasted. It wasn't the financal loss. It was how could this reputable dealer let him get screwed. How could the 3 rd party grading system fail so miserably?
Typos left in to verify authenticity.
collector at heart. More likely they were dabbling with an eye for profit.
EDIT: OK, I see there was a clarification above. Gee, pretty hard to believe that a lifelong collector "who loves
coins" and obviously possesses high intelligence can find out so late in the game that they've been assembling
[something horrible which we can't be privy to]. This person apparently never interacted with other
collectors or dealers who might have brought problems to their attention during the course of this lifelong
devotion to the hobby. Yep, sounds plausible to me...............
If the TPG failed so miserably, I'm sure they'll make it right. And if they didn't fail so miserably, and if the coin isn't really that bad, just isn't great, what just happened?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think the people that know and care can get the message without the need for further detail. >>
So let's summarize. We have a "doctored" "dog" that for some reason is not eligible for grade guarantee. What kind of coin would that be? Sounds like what we are really talking about is a low-end coin for the grade w/QT that managed to get into a holder. Dealer overpaid and then buried client in it. And how is the ANA supposed to fix that? >>
That is a big problem. But the problem of mid range to higher end range coins getting a grade bump on multiple attempts is the biggest problem. I'd say at least 10X the problem of
doctored coins. Those are the coins that the newbie collector or investor are more likely to run into. And this happens on big dollar coins too. The MS67 1839 no drapery half is a good
example. It ended up being purchased for the Joe Thomas collection at the peak of the market for $400K+. When it was sold a few years later it fetched around MS65 money...around
$140K to $175K as I recall. The coin was no better than MS65, only a 64 imo. It fetched what it was worth in the real market. Coin is not doctored. It lacked full mint luster in the
fields and have quite a bit of high point friction/rubbing....not something you'd expect to see on a 67, 66, or even a 65 coin. I don't believe this situation was ever made right by the TPG
along with other coins that were in that same collection. And I'm not sure why. Surely, someone must have mentioned to the owner at some point along the way that your 1839 half
is a couple points shy of MS67.....or maybe not.
The ANA could take on doctoring and overgrading. But I don't think they have unlimited war chest needed to take on all the dealers' lawyers that will fight them tooth and nail. Even if
ANA member lawyers worked for free the liability of losing such a fight could drain every dollar the ANA has, and might ever have.
<< <i>If someone exits the "hobby" on the basis of a single bad transaction, then maybe they weren't really a coin
collector at heart. More likely they were dabbling with an eye for profit.
EDIT: OK, I see there was a clarification above. Gee, pretty hard to believe that a lifelong collector "who loves
coins" and obviously possesses high intelligence can find out so late in the game that they've been assembling
[something horrible which we can't be privy to]. This person apparently never interacted with other
collectors or dealers who might have brought problems to their attention during the course of this lifelong
devotion to the hobby. Gee, sounds plausible to me............... >>
/eyeroll
<< <i>
<< <i>If someone exits the "hobby" on the basis of a single bad transaction, then maybe they weren't really a coin
collector at heart. More likely they were dabbling with an eye for profit.
EDIT: OK, I see there was a clarification above. Gee, pretty hard to believe that a lifelong collector "who loves
coins" and obviously possesses high intelligence can find out so late in the game that they've been assembling
[something horrible which we can't be privy to]. This person apparently never interacted with other
collectors or dealers who might have brought problems to their attention during the course of this lifelong
devotion to the hobby. Gee, sounds plausible to me............... >>
/eyeroll >>
I see the rebuttal was every bit as substantive as the initial testimony......
<< <i>This is what drives Laura. I submit that until you have been there - as either victim or new mentor to the victim - you will never truly understand:
the colelctor is a surgeon who had been a collector ALL his life. he loves his coins. he looks at tham as often as he can. he never had the time to fully learn how to grade-because he was buying certified coins from a major name dealer. When I broke the news to him he was devasted. It wasn't the financal loss. It was how could this reputable dealer let him get screwed. How could the 3 rd party grading system fail so miserably?
Typos left in to verify authenticity.
as long as this type of thing occurs, it's not beating a dead horse. this horse is still up and running around healthy as ever.
<< <i>
<< <i>Wow , pretty offensive seeing as you know that it is absolutely not the case. >>
Obviously, my point was to have you take it down a notch, obviously TDN doesn't want to name names and you can't blame him so why push. Do you think outing someone's name in these times is prudent for anybody? >>
well, at some point the ANA will have to name names.
and back to my one word post from some time ago: Proof?
from a leading New England dealer. The coin was magnificent to me. It sat proudly in my collection until 1988 when I had it graded along with my other key coins. NO GRADE - AT.
That was a shock. It was a stark lesson in the look of AT coins that told me I still had a lot to learn then....as well as today. Ultimately, the coin got dipped and ended up looking
horrendous with a grade of NGC PF62. It sold for around $450, the biggest % loss I ever took on a seated coin. And I could have made that same mistake 10 yrs later as well. Many
times during the 1997-2007 market I cracked out MS seated coins that I felt were undergraded....only to get back an AT. Would these misses have been lessened using dealers to buy
for me? I suspect it would have helped, though probably not eliminating the problem. Most of the coins sent to me by other dealers during that same period were often returned due
to excessive rub, weak or missing luster, or too many marks for the grade. We rarely even got to consider whether the coin could be AT....lol. I'd say my return rate during the
1980's on choice/gem raw MS seated "on approval" coins was over 80%. In the 1990's maybe 50% on slabbed coins. In the 2000's somewhere between 50-70%. I can only imagine
what a newbie collector would have been saddled with during those periods. A "lifelong" collector who never sells anything, can easily assemble a pile of swill that buries them. I've
seen it more than a couple of times, most recently with my brother-in-law who had collected for around 20 yrs, rarely selling anything. I never knew he collected more expensive coins
until he was forced to sell out in 2009. That was a shocker.
What would that accomplish?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>well, at some point the ANA will have to name names.
What would that accomplish? >>
should some dealer lose their ANA Approval(tm), that will be a good as naming names.
amount of financial damage to themselves, especially over a period of time. But assigning blame is a very
tricky proposition. I tend to place most of it on the buyer who failed to become educated in something
before sinking a considerable amount of capital into it.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If someone exits the "hobby" on the basis of a single bad transaction, then maybe they weren't really a coin
collector at heart. More likely they were dabbling with an eye for profit.
EDIT: OK, I see there was a clarification above. Gee, pretty hard to believe that a lifelong collector "who loves
coins" and obviously possesses high intelligence can find out so late in the game that they've been assembling
[something horrible which we can't be privy to]. This person apparently never interacted with other
collectors or dealers who might have brought problems to their attention during the course of this lifelong
devotion to the hobby. Gee, sounds plausible to me............... >>
/eyeroll >>
I see the rebuttal was every bit as substantive as the initial testimony......
Sorry, but I don't feel the need to testify for you or GreenieJr. You are free to disagree, but kindly don't be rude about it.
<< <i>Roadrunner, that was a great post. It's true that an uninformed buyer (of anything!) can do a tremendous
amount of financial damage to themselves, especially over a period of time. But assigning blame is a very
tricky proposition. I tend to place most of it on the buyer who failed to become educated in something
before sinking a considerable amount of capital into it. >>
It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal.
What exactly do you mean by "infrastructure"?
Do you think the bias is by design, or is it just a matter of survival of the fittest?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>This is what drives Laura. I submit that until you have been there - as either victim or new mentor to the victim - you will never truly understand:
the colelctor is a surgeon who had been a collector ALL his life. he loves his coins. he looks at tham as often as he can. he never had the time to fully learn how to grade-because he was buying certified coins from a major name dealer. When I broke the news to him he was devasted. It wasn't the financal loss. It was how could this reputable dealer let him get screwed. How could the 3 rd party grading system fail so miserably?
Typos left in to verify authenticity.
Hard to believe that a 500k sale was lost due to earlier issues. This surgeon finally made it to the right place got crushed on prior SLABBED coins and now runs off?? Should have been a new chapter in his life, now way every coin in his collection was crap.
I have never believed in the ONE dealer theory to buy coins and i have never bought into the never sell a coin collecting. If you never sell a coin to me that would be more of a reason to bail than buying crap from one dealer. A true collector can stomach a loss on coins, an investor maybe not. Everyone that has collected more than 6 months should have there eyes wide open on what happens in this business. I have no issue with coins being worth less years down the road, my issue is when coins are only worth 25 cents on the dollar the week after the purchase. You can not control the future but a week later....
This same story told can be told a 100 times with different dealers and customers, the only difference is the value. Plus for everyone that feels his dealer shafted him, a lot more will be happy with the same dealer.
I say they guy was jerking you on the 500k coin cause he was in a win/win. He could sue the prior dealer, work with the grading companies, dump his entire collection and end up with ONE (1) KILLER coin to start with.
So what did he do with the 500k PLUS and his pile of ....
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal. >>
Couldn't the exact same thing be said of the art market, real estate, even the stock market to a certain extent? We all agree on legal protection for fraud and those protections exist in varying degrees depending on what you are buying. Our problem in the coin biz seems to be defining exactly where fraud begins. And that is only half the battle, after you agree on that you still have to deal with the enforcement side. And, even if you get past all that, you still can't protect people from themselves and making dumb buying decisions. So the ANA says, let's just focus on education instead. To be honest, there are worse ways to approach the problem.......
<< <i>
<< <i>Roadrunner, that was a great post. It's true that an uninformed buyer (of anything!) can do a tremendous
amount of financial damage to themselves, especially over a period of time. But assigning blame is a very
tricky proposition. I tend to place most of it on the buyer who failed to become educated in something
before sinking a considerable amount of capital into it. >>
It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal. >>
In a nutshell: Knowledge is power, and power tends to "attract" money. So, no, I don't believe the
playing field can really be leveled, because some parties will always be better informed, have
stronger connections, etc.
<< <i>
<< <i>It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal. >>
Couldn't the exact same thing be said of the art market, real estate, even the stock market to a certain extent? We all agree on legal protection for fraud and those protections exist in varying degrees depending on what you are buying. Our problem in the coin biz seems to be defining exactly where fraud begins. And that is only half the battle, after you agree on that you still have to deal with the enforcement side. And, even if you get past all that, you still can't protect people from themselves and making dumb buying decisions. So the ANA says, let's just focus on education instead. To be honest, there are worse ways to approach the problem....... >>
+1
Trying to come up with true value of anything can be hard, throw in a salesperson that can sale ice to a eskimo....
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>t seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable.
What exactly do you mean by "infrastructure"?
Do you think the bias is by design, or is it just a matter of survival of the fittest? >>
Infrastructure could be the sum of all organizations, companies, dealerships, auctioneers, clubs, journalists, etc. that provide services and goods to the numismatic consumer. I do not think it is by design.
Here's a better example. The Osburn collection of approx 150 PF/MS seated halves that was sold at auction at the summer ANA sale in 2011. The breakdown of slabbed coins was
55% NGC and 45% PCGS. Of the coins listed only 3% of the NGC coins stickered, 38% for PCGS....combined sticker rate of 19%. I have to assume that all the coins were presented for
stickering. Maybe they weren't. But the 13-1 ratio of PCGS to NGC stickering was very unusual imo. I don't know how such a ratio could have been achieved. It baffles me. The prices
realized on these coins was very poor, and especially the 80 or so non-stickered NGC coins. The collection must have netted a few hundred thousand dollars which is serious money.
So here was a collection assembled by a knowledgeable dealer,an insider in the seated coin trade, having access to a huge number of coins over many years. This was not newbie
collector or investor. I don't know if the seller profited, or lost money on these coins, just that the prices realized were stunningly low for the assigned grades. How would a newbie have
done purchasing from the same sources? I'd bet that some collectors considering building or just having started a seated coin set might look at these results and say, "if that's the best
that an educated and experienced specialist dealer can do, why should I attempt it?"
I can't explain the results nor can I even state the grading proficiency of the owner since I've never worked with him before. I just know that the results achieved were not good
over a multi-year period by a very seasoned dealer/collector. Not every coin in the collection was low end as I noted half a dozen or so coins out of the 150 that realized very strong
or runaway prices. But the vast majority received very weak prices (ie low end money). I was shocked by the large number of coins realizing next grade down money. I can only
assume that buyers felt the coins were 1 grade lower too.
<< <i>Sorry, but I don't feel the need to testify for you or GreenieJr. You are free to disagree, but kindly don't be rude about it. >>
With all due respect, you and your partner have shown a pattern of making vague statements
that shine a negative light on other dealers, the grading services, numismatic professional
organizations, etc. When anyone calls you out and asks for specifics, you invariably refuse
to provide them. It gets rather tiresome.
Frankly, if I were a wealthy individual who knew nothing about coins, I would not be attracted
to the hobby by most of what I read on your web site, in terms of either content or presentation.
I'm quite sure you couldn't care less, and that's really fine. No need for a response.
<< <i>
<< <i>Roadrunner, that was a great post. It's true that an uninformed buyer (of anything!) can do a tremendous
amount of financial damage to themselves, especially over a period of time. But assigning blame is a very
tricky proposition. I tend to place most of it on the buyer who failed to become educated in something
before sinking a considerable amount of capital into it. >>
It seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable. The question then becomes this: can the ANA, or any other coordinated effort be effective in leveling the playing field?
I am not sure I know the answer, and I am not sure that the hobby-business-industry as a whole is committed to that goal. >>
I agree with this. It seems like less knowledgable collectors often suffer losses in this hobby and the hobby-industrial-complex is structured to take advantage of this. It seems like there's a substantial, systemic interest in maintaining the status quo to the detriment of less knowledgable collectors. Voice advocating change are refreshing and welcome.
<< <i>With all due respect, you and your partner have shown a pattern of making vague statements
that shine a negative light on other dealers, the grading services, numismatic professional
organizations, etc. When anyone calls you out and asks for specifics, you invariably refuse
to provide them. It gets rather tiresome. >>
I think there have been enough details that the discussion can be fairly interesting, much more so than simply avoiding the topic. Positive comments have been made about TGPs like our host, so this is not a systemic issue. Additionally, I do remember specifics being listed in the past with some lawyerly advice afterwards so I don't fault them on not naming dealers.
<< <i>
<< <i>t seems to me that the infrastructure of the coin hobby-business-industry exists for the betterment of the established and knowledgeable players (dealers and, to a lesser extent, collectors) and to the detriment of those that know the least, have the poorest connections, the worst "eye" for quality, and are the most vulnerable.
What exactly do you mean by "infrastructure"?
Do you think the bias is by design, or is it just a matter of survival of the fittest? >>
Infrastructure could be the sum of all organizations, companies, dealerships, auctioneers, clubs, journalists, etc. that provide services and goods to the numismatic consumer. I do not think it is by design. >>
It may have originally not been by design.
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......
to avail his or herself at educational seminars
at the local regional and national level to gain
knowledge.
Also, I consider myself an experienced collector
yet I still pay for a professionals eyeballs from
time to time to look at coins for me or represent me
at auction.
There are a certain few who get virtually all my business
because of the trust that was built with me by
these coin professionals.
I do not blame anyone but myself for mistakes
I have made in the past
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.