Options
A slippery slope - too late to stop?
tradedollarnut
Posts: 20,161 ✭✭✭✭✭
I was shocked when I saw the price on this coin. Price guide is $9250. Since there is no Santa Claus in numismatics, I think we can figure out why it's priced midway between 64&65 money. Next, price guide will be lowered to reflect the sale.
0
Comments
would you like to offer your opinions , for reason .. not a 65 ?
No way to tell from those images...but if a solid 65 then why the nearly 40% discount?
Negative eye appeal, IMO.
It may very well influence the guide price for other 65's, a hot topic scenario of late.
Lance.
Coin market is in the toilet and price guides are slow to catch up.
Here's the TrueView. I wonder how long it will last at $5,950.
It's not an ugly coin, but the dark spots may have detracted from their value. Interesting colors overall.
CCAC Representative of the General Public
Columnist for The Numismatist
2021 Young Numismatist of the Year
It sold for $5170 a couple months ago... I think guide is wrong.
Might be a good candidate to send in for conservation.
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
just a hunch, but it was probably slabbed at PCGS and sent to CAC where it failed to win approval. subsequently it was sold at Heritage and probably sent to CAC where it failed to win approval. now it is being dumped again. if I interpret all the CAC threads properly, it is a coin which is properly graded but not one that JA wishes to buy so he won't sticker it.
this is all an outgrowth of the CAC phenomenon where a single individual can control the buying whims of the Hobby. I suppose that the pre-eminent expert on Trade Dollars, TDN, would not be posing this question about a coin with the little green sticker. he might not like the coin, but he would probably be offering an opinion rather than asking a question if the coin had the sticker.
it seems that 1877-S in MS65 with a green CAC sticker is a common enough coin, so the opinion of JA is driving the price guide and the choices of collectors.
JMHO, of course.
TDN , why can't you accept the fact the world does not love TD's like you do? A set in MS65 is impossible to complete. The demand for fugly coins like this is not there obviously.
You should know not to grade via an image. There was a reason why this coin sold for what it did in heritage.
Looking at apr's back to 2012, 4 coins exceeded 10k, all were cac; 2 others realized close to guide, both cac; just in early 2012 2 coins both non cac sold for between 8 and 9k. The rest on the list were well under guide , and none were stickered. So maybe Keets is on to something.
I like the coin as it is, but understand why some collectors wouldn't.
Unfortunately the latest price will probably lead to the coin being 'conserved', regraded, etc. Another (possibly) original coin going through the wash cycle.
Buy the coin, not the plastic, the sticker or the S&H green stamps.
sage advice, but not where we're headed. if you read some of the replies at another page one thread it is clear, there is a trend away from the hands-on experience of buying coins in person at shows/shops and a move towards "speculation" buying online from pictures. as technology advances and TPG type service are refined it will only get worse.
it is easier for many to buy a coin from their home that looks nice in the pictures and has the "backing" of multiple examinations by independent parties. think about it --- you could get a coin in a PCGS holder that has a CAC sticker, Snow Seal, sticker by segoja and, believe it or not, a sticker from Littleton Coins that all assure you it is OK to buy the coin.
insanity reigns.
The price seems to make sense to me when I look at the auction prices. First, I notice there seems to be a lot of auction date for this coin in just a couple of years. The high price was $8812 for a CAC PCGS coin in 9/16 (note that the CAC coin does not even bring the PCGS price value). Other recent PCGS sales are $7637, $5581 and $4465.
Translation.....no sticker = Dreck.
The coin itself appears to have a nice strike and good surfaces.... lousy tarnish..... That being said, I can see a speculator buying this coin and making it pretty... then sell for a profit. Cheers, RickO
Major scuff in the right obverse field which is quite a distraction for a 65. There are surely some other marks .
Gem type trade dollars are somewhat available in the era of gradeflation 2. This coin surely would have been a 64 back in the 1988-2003 era. A lot of coins are returning to their grades (or prices) of the 2002-2004 era. Even if the grade is higher, the price will reflect reality. I like this coin...as a 64+. Very appealing imo.
Available coins trade for approx 60-70% of price guide. And that would certainly include "available" later 19th century type coins, esp. those not stickered. So the selling price range for this coin is more like $5500-$6500. Superior examples would likely bring more.
@1Mike1 said: "Might be a good candidate to send in for conservation."
IMHO, ABSOLUTELY NOT!!! O'Lord, it's hard to be...
I have been wrong a few times before. LOL. 
@specialist said: "TDN , why can't you accept the fact the world does not love TD's like you do? A set in MS65 is impossible to complete. The demand for fugly coins like this is not there obviously. You should know not to grade via an image. There was a reason why this coin sold for what it did in heritage."
Now, that's what I call some "tough love." Looks like with this era of images and information we'll be able to trace the appearances of every high-grade coin.
I believe that there are a few marks on this puppy that will look worse if it's dipped. I am far from an expert on the series or on conservation, and could be wrong, so I wouldn't do it. I think you might end up with a nice decent 64 if you dipped it.
Once again, always ask the seller to send you the TrueVue coin, not the one in the auction
Commems are suffering the same fate.
There was a time when a coin that looked like this would not be considered to be a "gem" MS65 "investment-grade" coin
If MS65s are not gems anymore, then prices will adjust to reflect this.
Commems and Early Type
There was never a time before approx 2013-2017 when a type coin with this look would be excluded from being a gem. This look is fine and is typical of the toning often seen from the 1850's to 1880's MS seated coins. What is the ultimate decider of gem status are luster, marks, and strike. This coin looks fine on all counts except possibly for marks. With fewer marks/hairlines this coin would have been a stone gem in previous eras.
Maybe what is truly "dead," is the idea of sellers getting full retail prices for their coins (ie 30-60% above wholesale). Retail price guides have limited use in such an environment.
It's still just a guide , no matter what. That's the slope we get tripped up on.
The buying and selling of coins is not equivalent to lawn mowers or stock certificates. Each coin transaction is unique. This makes all price guides simply collections of loosely correlated data, and merely descriptive, not predictive.
Keets....I totally agree. One man should not have that much impact on the overall coin market.
RE: "One man should not have that much impact on the overall coin market."
Control is ceded not assumed. Collectors and others on the business end have handed control of grades and suitability to corporate entities.
The lighting on Phil’s True View image depicts the coin exhibiting more Cartwheel Luster than TDN’s original image post, with some mint luster illuminating from underneath the toning.
TDN’s original image makes the toning appear more opaque, esp in the prime focal area at 11-12 o’clock on the obverse, where some may argue it’s less attractive.
The spotty toning pattern and apparent opacity of the toning is reminiscent of potential slight environmental damage (tarnish as RickO says). One man’s attractive toning is another man’s unattractive tarnish.
Interesting coin and interesting thread...
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
not a fan of that toning. i don't know this series well, but i can see why some other 65's may command more money. it's not a stretch.
Those of us who regularly photograph coins either professionally or casually as part of the hobby know that you can capture very complimentary (Glamour Shot), or very harsh uncomplimentary images of the same coin, by using various illumination types and lighting angles.
The Numismatic Truth is usually somewhere in between both of these extremes.
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
Does the anchoring heuristic work in numismatics? Having seen prior sale prices in the 5200-5600 range, would potential buyers be willing to pay more? (shrug)
I personally don't like the look of this coin and for the money I would look for a better coin in 64 plus holder....
Perhaps trade dollars are not much in demand.
Every coin is unique and should be priced as such. When you speak of the coin as being priced at a 40% discount, you support the fiction that rare coins can be priced as fungible commodities. Of course I know that you know better. So maybe it's your own thinking that is sliding down a slippery slope of sorts? (:>)
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
There is a huge collector base that hasn't jumped on the plastic-bean wagon yet.
The sleeping giant is still .... well a sleeping giant.
Price guide is way off on a lot, and folks had better get used to it, or they wont be selling much. Tangible probably knows this as they are in the know. This is not just my spoken words, many national dealers I deal and talk with will tell you the same thing privately.
Why would they be off by this much? What can be done to get them more inline?
@JRocco said: "There is a huge collector base that hasn't jumped on the plastic-bean wagon yet. The sleeping giant is still .... well a sleeping giant."
I disagree. IMO, your "Sleeping Giant" is mostly composed of CRH, hoarders, accumulators, John Q. know-nothing, etc. The folks who buy "real coins" are mostly absorbed into the slab game. A small percentage are not. In the 1980's when slabs became popular, there were actually some famous, professional dealers who refused to join in.
Their cases are full of slabs now...LOL. What I'm trying to convey is 96% of the folks who buy and sell coins are on the slab wagon.
Now, I just noticed that you posted PLASTIC BEAN wagon. In that case, I can see your point. The presence of the green sticker adds value and "knocks" coins (in the mind of some) that don't have it. I'll guarantee that someone with deep pockets is eventually going to come out with a different colored bean (probably gold) for coins they would back with a buy offer.
Anyway, I've heard that there is lots of "junk" in slabs either with the bean or not.
JDimmick,
Does your following post refer to all Numismatic Price Guides (CDN, TPGS, Numismedia, Coin World & Heritage Value Index)?
I find the Heritage Auction Archives of actual auction sales prices to be most accurate, and the Heritage Value Index to correlate best with CDN wholesale values by bracketing above & below them.
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
RE: "When you speak of the coin as being priced at a 40% discount, you support the fiction that rare coins can be priced as fungible commodities."
As the old hobby saying goes, "There is no fungicide in numismatics!" (...or something like that.)
Bullchit. I know trade dollars and I know trade dollar prices. A solid gem is a $9k coin. Spin it any way you want but what I see is just not right
As I understand the PCGS grading scale, an accurately graded low end 65 is not and was never supposed to be "a solid gem".
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
It used to be
To those complaining about price guides:
As a "data weenie", I'm of the opinion that price guides are supposed to REPORT prices realized, and not support, drive, or influence prices realized. They should set the rules for their algorithm, and let the chips fall.
(It might include logical rules like throwing out the low, and the high, or maybe put more credence on auction over fixed price, or vice versa....but they need to decide that up-front, and not after the fact).
Any attempt to "fix the price guides" is an attempt to manipulate them. And those who are running the guides shouldn't stand for it!
That was 30+ years ago, before PCGS and NGC came to town. I know how that must sound to anyone who was not active back then, but I'm not exaggerating, Ask Laura, CJ or HRH if you don't believe me. We were there.
One thing that should be clarified. Even though PCGS and NGC essentially set 66 as the "gem" level, they were, for a number of reasons, slower to apply that looser standard to the "big boy" coins. Perhaps one of the reasons was that there were no gem Bust Dollars and Stellas in the TPGs' grading reference sets? (:>)
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
No, it wasn't 30+ years ago. It was a little over ten years ago when Pcgs gems were solid for the grade - almost without exception.
I love Pcgs in general - I'm a huge supporter - but this coin is bs. Laura has seen it in hand and graded the obverse 63/64. That NEVER used to happen. And it's not the only one - I shake my head at some of the gem seated dollars that I've seen lately...
Who will stand up and say enough is enough?
With toning some people suspect that something is being hidden, like with this $2K plus coin:
I don't know why ebay limits their advanced search feature at 90 days, all results should be searchable like on HA.
I hate to sound like Bill Jones - because in my opinion CAC is what's preventing a complete free for all - but I am NOT going to regrade all my sets. I will sell them off and start collecting pretty common coins before I contribute tens of thousands of dollars to the grade inflation gravy train
bad news TDN, most of the commoner coins of the world are upgraded. a collector friend of mine today was sharing his MS Barber Quarter w/me that went from 66 to MS66 to a MS68 (NGC) to a PCGS MS67+ now....I liked the coin but was bewildered by all that.
never forget, the grading services do not maintain consistent grading teams. that could be part of the problem
billjones? what you think you were invited to be a grader at CAC?
JA would be lucky to have me. Lol