I no longer own CLCT, but I did very well with that asset over the last 10 years. The secret was, to purchase when doom & gloom was prevalent circa 2008 or 2009, and sell when "Irrational exuberance" was the name of the game, via circa 2015 and 2016. I might jump back in at $11 a share.
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
People forget that the stock market was growing at a 25% clip for several years through 1999.
I retired Jan 2000, then endured the dotcom bust but recouped the lost in 2-3 years.
I'm not exactly a day trader but do 1500+ trades a year (enough to have both Fidelity and Schwab give me entirely free trades) but those trades are small continual adjustments based almost entirely on momentum. Also done for tax balancing
No matter how much I like a stock, I won't buy it until it starts going up. The impression (guess) is that Clct is at a support level and perhaps will reverse or just a bounce from $15 but has the potential to break down further to $10 in several months
I'd only be interested if it were to break $20 but that will be a long time from now.
BTW it was a silver loss that taught me not to hold on to losing positions (but that's another story)
50% cut in dividend = Loss of investor confidence. CLCT will settle in between $10 - $15. Right now it's not worth any more than that. I'd be a buyer 2 months from now between $10 - $12 with a tight stop.
@FadeToBlack said:
When your stock is dropping like a rock while the market is rebounding like no correction ever happened, it's freefalling. I agree that $12 or so might be a decent entry. I also don't think it will get there, at least not in the current environment.
I guess another way to look at is with so many other stocks working why own this until the price becomes so compelling and capitulation is complete? Dayum that was a long sentence.
m
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......
When buying stocks forget about the fact that you may like the product the stock is involved with. Stick with the fundamentals and avoid irrational exuberance. Never trust rosy statements by management.
Good to see CLCT bounced back a bit in today's stock market which is also bouncing back.
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
Could the stock go a bit lower, possibly, but i still think it's a great long term buy in a well balanced portfolio. Buy it and just hold it, don't worry about the swings.
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
Simply stated, it's not a Sears situation because Sears who used to be #1, has dropped to I'm not sure what level in the retail product marketplace, overwhelmed by Amazon and even other brick and mortar stores. Collectors Universe has no intractable competition such as that.
I'm not familiar with the management of Collector's Universe. However i do know that CU has been the #1 grading company of coins and cards for a good long number of years, and they still are. Any company managed like that, with no discernible stiff competition out there in the foreseeable future, in my view will find ways to continue to stay #1 and grow from there.
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
Simply stated, it's not a Sears situation because Sears who used to be #1, has dropped to I'm not sure what level in the retail product marketplace, overwhelmed by Amazon and even other brick and mortar stores. Collectors Universe has no intractable competition such as that.
I'm not familiar with the management of Collector's Universe. However i do know that CU has been the #1 grading company of coins and cards for a good long number of years, and they still are. Any company managed like that, with no discernible stiff competition out there in the foreseeable future, in my view will find ways to continue to stay #1 and grow from there.
It really depends on how one defines #1. What are your metrics for saying this? 'No discernable stiff competition?' Really?
The other choice, NGC, is not publicly traded, so hard to find out what its profits are. They have graded 39 million coins which matches or betters PCGS in terms of total of number of coins graded. And NGC is not beholden to share holders, so they are in a strong position right now. All I know is I see alot of foreign and bullion coins in new NGC holders, so they seem to have a large throughput and probably have metrics that match or beat PCGS - it is all about how many coins you grade after all. As mentioned above, the classic US type market for grading is not going to sustain any large company any mnore as it is pretty much topped out and a minor part of the buisness........ So even if one feels that PCGS is tops in that market, that does not define the #1 company as that grading is mostly over.
When a companies stock crashes that hard because of a reduced dividend, there is a strong head wind for the near future. We will see what the outcome for this is, maybe they will loosen the grading again to try to get more buisness.......
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
Simply stated, it's not a Sears situation because Sears who used to be #1, has dropped to I'm not sure what level in the retail product marketplace, overwhelmed by Amazon and even other brick and mortar stores. Collectors Universe has no intractable competition such as that.
I'm not familiar with the management of Collector's Universe. However i do know that CU has been the #1 grading company of coins and cards for a good long number of years, and they still are. Any company managed like that, with no discernible stiff competition out there in the foreseeable future, in my view will find ways to continue to stay #1 and grow from there.
Best of breed in an industy that is struggling is not a exactly a recipe for success
Mark
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......
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
Simply stated, it's not a Sears situation because Sears who used to be #1, has dropped to I'm not sure what level in the retail product marketplace, overwhelmed by Amazon and even other brick and mortar stores. Collectors Universe has no intractable competition such as that.
I'm not familiar with the management of Collector's Universe. However i do know that CU has been the #1 grading company of coins and cards for a good long number of years, and they still are. Any company managed like that, with no discernible stiff competition out there in the foreseeable future, in my view will find ways to continue to stay #1 and grow from there.
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
Simply stated, it's not a Sears situation because Sears who used to be #1, has dropped to I'm not sure what level in the retail product marketplace, overwhelmed by Amazon and even other brick and mortar stores. Collectors Universe has no intractable competition such as that.
I'm not familiar with the management of Collector's Universe. However i do know that CU has been the #1 grading company of coins and cards for a good long number of years, and they still are. Any company managed like that, with no discernible stiff competition out there in the foreseeable future, in my view will find ways to continue to stay #1 and grow from there.
... and just how is it going to grow?
To be straight with ya...those management folks at CU are a lot smarter than us I'm sure, and I think they will find a way to grow based on their successful past performance.
Look, if they fail to do that, then the stock will continue to decline. That's what picking the right stocks is all about, good product and good management. Good management includes reinventing a company and finding new and improved ways to make money when necessary.
Necessity is the mother of invention. In my opinion, the management of CU will find another grading "necessity" out there or something else which will make the stock a good long term buy.
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
As long as turnaround times are measured in weeks instead of days it doesn't make much difference if they're grading a 93-s or an 84-o Morgan.
I can't make heads or tails out of the market. That's why I work every day. I can turn two million dollars into one million. I'm a coin dealer. It's easy. Let me show you how, today.
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
Simply stated, it's not a Sears situation because Sears who used to be #1, has dropped to I'm not sure what level in the retail product marketplace, overwhelmed by Amazon and even other brick and mortar stores. Collectors Universe has no intractable competition such as that.
I'm not familiar with the management of Collector's Universe. However i do know that CU has been the #1 grading company of coins and cards for a good long number of years, and they still are. Any company managed like that, with no discernible stiff competition out there in the foreseeable future, in my view will find ways to continue to stay #1 and grow from there.
All I can hear is Danny DeVito saying:
" I have just 2 words to say.... Buggy Whips "
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
Simply stated, it's not a Sears situation because Sears who used to be #1, has dropped to I'm not sure what level in the retail product marketplace, overwhelmed by Amazon and even other brick and mortar stores. Collectors Universe has no intractable competition such as that.
I'm not familiar with the management of Collector's Universe. However i do know that CU has been the #1 grading company of coins and cards for a good long number of years, and they still are. Any company managed like that, with no discernible stiff competition out there in the foreseeable future, in my view will find ways to continue to stay #1 and grow from there.
All I can hear is Danny DeVito saying:
" I have just 2 words to say.... Buggy Whips "
Yea, but if the buggy whip manufacturers branched out into manufacturing fan belts, then they made out pretty good now didn't they?
BTW: Whips for all sorts of applications are still being made.....including personal use - LOL
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
I'd be very surprised if CU hasn't fully explored this possibility. Perhaps they feel the human eye still does a better job of grading than a computer for their types of collectibles. After all, it is our human eye that attracts us to a collectible item that we like.
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
I'd be very surprised if CU hasn't fully explored this possibility. Perhaps they feel the human eye still does a better job of grading than a computer for their types of collectibles. After all, it is our human eye that attracts us to a collectible item that we like.
PCGS spent 7 figures on R&D for computerized grading back in the early 1990's, but they ultimately decided the technology could not be developed at that time. I would maintain, even in 2018, that the technology to grade coins via AI is impossible. At least for classic coins with an infinite range of strike details, post-mint wear/damage, etc. However, it should be pretty easy for a computer to grade modern coins in 69/70 with a very specific set of tolerance for imperfections. The problem will always be that grading classic coins is an art, not science.
John Feigenbaum Whitman Brands: President/CEO (www.greysheet.com; www.whitman.com) PNG: Executive Director (www.pngdealers.org)
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
Wasn’t that what PCGS and NGC we’re originally doing (supposedly)? They have also always maintained that grading was consistent. I was always under the impression that the TPGS
utilized the market grading concept later to increase revenues as a service like the one you describe would go under quickly
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
I'd be very surprised if CU hasn't fully explored this possibility. Perhaps they feel the human eye still does a better job of grading than a computer for their types of collectibles. After all, it is our human eye that attracts us to a collectible item that we like.
Yep. I doubt that a computer would do very well with eye appeal.
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
I'd be very surprised if CU hasn't fully explored this possibility. Perhaps they feel the human eye still does a better job of grading than a computer for their types of collectibles. After all, it is our human eye that attracts us to a collectible item that we like.
Yep. I doubt that a computer would do very well with eye appeal.
There's no reason why AI couldn't learn how to factor in eye appeal if all the coins had high-quality images, for example.
I've said it in the past, but I think the sheldon scale is outdated and a 100 point system with points for separate categories makes more sense.
Or just drop EA from the equation and let the buyer decide what suits his taste/s. How would that print be subtracted from EA in Wayne's thread. The AI would only be as good the opinion of the person setting up the system.
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
I'd be very surprised if CU hasn't fully explored this possibility. Perhaps they feel the human eye still does a better job of grading than a computer for their types of collectibles. After all, it is our human eye that attracts us to a collectible item that we like.
Yep. I doubt that a computer would do very well with eye appeal.
There's no reason why AI couldn't learn how to factor in eye appeal if all the coins had high-quality images, for example.
I've said it in the past, but I think the sheldon scale is outdated and a 100 point system with points for separate categories makes more sense.
Or just drop EA from the equation and let the buyer decide what suits his taste/s. How would that print be subtracted from EA in wayne's thread. The AI would only be as good the opinion of the person setting up the system.
This.
It would be the EA that would establish the price for a particular coin.
All 65's should grade the same but not all be worth the same.
Or just drop EA from the equation and let the buyer decide what suits his taste/s. How would that print be subtracted from EA in wayne's thread. The AI would only be as good the opinion of the person setting up the system.
This.
It would be the EA that would establish the price for a particular coin.
All 65's should grade the same but not all be worth the same.
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
I'd be very surprised if CU hasn't fully explored this possibility. Perhaps they feel the human eye still does a better job of grading than a computer for their types of collectibles. After all, it is our human eye that attracts us to a collectible item that we like.
Yep. I doubt that a computer would do very well with eye appeal.
There's no reason why AI couldn't learn how to factor in eye appeal if all the coins had high-quality images, for example.
I've said it in the past, but I think the sheldon scale is outdated and a 100 point system with points for separate categories makes more sense.
Or just drop EA from the equation and let the buyer decide what suits his taste/s. How would that print be subtracted from EA in Wayne's thread. The AI would only be as good the opinion of the person setting up the system.
This.
It would be the EA that would establish the price for a particular coin.
All 65's should grade the same but not all be worth the same.
Kinda like it is now at times. If a computer said a coin was ms63 and you showed it to 20 different professional graders, I wonder how many would agree that the computer got it right.
There's no reason why AI couldn't learn how to factor in eye appeal if all the coins had high-quality images, for example.
...
There are two big problems with this. First, you have to be able to teach the computer what the "ground truth" is with respect to scoring eye appeal. This is not easy in a domain like eye appeal where if you ask 9 different experts, you get 10 different answers. Second, you have to be able to have the input to the computer match what the eye sees. This includes lighting, tipping the coin around in the luster, and using both eyes. Sure you can simply say "scan" it, but that scan has to contain all the information you and I see, and it has to be repeatable.
AI probably has a role in classifying real vs. artificial toning, assuming that it is given a lot of ground truth data from which it can perform with both high sensitivity and high selectivity.
Clearly, AI can't assess "eye-appeal," since the very term asserts subjectivity. Any AI system for technical grading would properly ignore eye appeal, and leave that to the tastes of the collector as to its market value.
Technical grading is an entirely different matter. One can program in criteria: number of hits, location of the blemishes, hairlines, etc. The criteria obviously needs to be agreed upon and set by humans in concert who would be responsible for refinement, but the standards should then be permanently set, and loosening/tightening should be a thing in the past. PCGS already has Secure, which establishes a permanency to the coin's identity, and which can be absorbed into such a system.
And yes, the model would greatly harm such a company's bottom line, as coins once graded would theoretically stay graded, and resubmissions would drastically decline.
@dpoole said:
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
That would be a positive for the hobby.
I don't know. How is the currency market these days? CLCT's grading revenues from currency grading fees are down. The bills are all serialized so it's harder to have "fresh" currency come on the market. All this does is bifurcate the market even further.
And yes, the model would greatly harm such a company's bottom line, as coins once graded would theoretically stay graded, and resubmissions would drastically decline.
Which is why it will never happen. The shifts from tight grades, to loose, back to tight, and so on drives for revenues for the TPGs. However as a collector, the recent period of gradeflation really ruined it for me. I cut back on my purchases greatly and I didn’t have the time or the interest to play the crackout game.
Pretty sure grades have nothing to do with it. Fewer collectors, fewer submissions. Coin prices tell us everything we need to know. Stock price reacting accordingly.
@dpoole said:
And yes, the model would greatly harm such a company's bottom line, as coins once graded would theoretically stay graded, and resubmissions would drastically decline.
Maybe, maybe not. Models can be fine tuned to adapt to the needs to change them, whether as a result of actual errors in results or a redefinition of the ground truth.
I watch the stock and the financials. I can tell you the company is not covering the dividend with cash flow from operations. When this occurs the smart investors dump the shares as the dividend will be reduced or suspended. Last I saw was an 8% cash yield from the current dividend. If this is not a sell sign nothing is.
There is no free lunch or accidental high yield in this situation. Divide the dividend by the stock price and multiply the product by 100 and you will get the cash yield. CLCT is over four times the S&P.
Comments
I no longer own CLCT, but I did very well with that asset over the last 10 years. The secret was, to purchase when doom & gloom was prevalent circa 2008 or 2009, and sell when "Irrational exuberance" was the name of the game, via circa 2015 and 2016. I might jump back in at $11 a share.
Yep. I just assumed the actual price would be a little lower. But, as mentioned above, that presumes any dividend payout is sustainable.
People forget that the stock market was growing at a 25% clip for several years through 1999.
I retired Jan 2000, then endured the dotcom bust but recouped the lost in 2-3 years.
I'm not exactly a day trader but do 1500+ trades a year (enough to have both Fidelity and Schwab give me entirely free trades) but those trades are small continual adjustments based almost entirely on momentum. Also done for tax balancing
No matter how much I like a stock, I won't buy it until it starts going up. The impression (guess) is that Clct is at a support level and perhaps will reverse or just a bounce from $15 but has the potential to break down further to $10 in several months
I'd only be interested if it were to break $20 but that will be a long time from now.
BTW it was a silver loss that taught me not to hold on to losing positions (but that's another story)
50% cut in dividend = Loss of investor confidence. CLCT will settle in between $10 - $15. Right now it's not worth any more than that. I'd be a buyer 2 months from now between $10 - $12 with a tight stop.
I guess another way to look at is with so many other stocks working why own this until the price becomes so compelling and capitulation is complete? Dayum that was a long sentence.
m
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......
When buying stocks forget about the fact that you may like the product the stock is involved with. Stick with the fundamentals and avoid irrational exuberance. Never trust rosy statements by management.
Good to see CLCT bounced back a bit in today's stock market which is also bouncing back.
The bounce in CLCT isn't a "dead cat bounce", it's not a Sears situation, Collectors Universe is still the best grading choice for coins and cards, and that has a lot of value.
Could the stock go a bit lower, possibly, but i still think it's a great long term buy in a well balanced portfolio. Buy it and just hold it, don't worry about the swings.
How can you say that it is not a Sears situation? IMHO, it is worse than Sears. Most of the classic coins (the real meat of the coin market) that are slabable are already graded. Grade inflation, plus grades, and other cute enhancements can generate revenue for a short period of time, but it won’t create sustainable revenue long term.
Simply stated, it's not a Sears situation because Sears who used to be #1, has dropped to I'm not sure what level in the retail product marketplace, overwhelmed by Amazon and even other brick and mortar stores. Collectors Universe has no intractable competition such as that.
I'm not familiar with the management of Collector's Universe. However i do know that CU has been the #1 grading company of coins and cards for a good long number of years, and they still are. Any company managed like that, with no discernible stiff competition out there in the foreseeable future, in my view will find ways to continue to stay #1 and grow from there.
Heh heh heh. Don’t quit your day job
It really depends on how one defines #1. What are your metrics for saying this? 'No discernable stiff competition?' Really?
The other choice, NGC, is not publicly traded, so hard to find out what its profits are. They have graded 39 million coins which matches or betters PCGS in terms of total of number of coins graded. And NGC is not beholden to share holders, so they are in a strong position right now. All I know is I see alot of foreign and bullion coins in new NGC holders, so they seem to have a large throughput and probably have metrics that match or beat PCGS - it is all about how many coins you grade after all. As mentioned above, the classic US type market for grading is not going to sustain any large company any mnore as it is pretty much topped out and a minor part of the buisness........ So even if one feels that PCGS is tops in that market, that does not define the #1 company as that grading is mostly over.
When a companies stock crashes that hard because of a reduced dividend, there is a strong head wind for the near future. We will see what the outcome for this is, maybe they will loosen the grading again to try to get more buisness.......
Best, SH
Best of breed in an industy that is struggling is not a exactly a recipe for success
Mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I'm very happy w/ my pension & SS checks.
The comment wasn’t directed at you
... and just how is it going to grow?
I know, but it's so tempting I couldn't resist, sorry.
To be straight with ya...those management folks at CU are a lot smarter than us I'm sure, and I think they will find a way to grow based on their successful past performance.
Look, if they fail to do that, then the stock will continue to decline. That's what picking the right stocks is all about, good product and good management. Good management includes reinventing a company and finding new and improved ways to make money when necessary.
Necessity is the mother of invention. In my opinion, the management of CU will find another grading "necessity" out there or something else which will make the stock a good long term buy.
This. +1
As long as turnaround times are measured in weeks instead of days it doesn't make much difference if they're grading a 93-s or an 84-o Morgan.
I can't make heads or tails out of the market. That's why I work every day. I can turn two million dollars into one million. I'm a coin dealer. It's easy. Let me show you how, today.
The Street downgraded clct today. Not looking good for the stock.
Successful Trades: Swampboy,
All I can hear is Danny DeVito saying:
" I have just 2 words to say.... Buggy Whips "
Yea, but if the buggy whip manufacturers branched out into manufacturing fan belts, then they made out pretty good now didn't they?
BTW: Whips for all sorts of applications are still being made.....including personal use - LOL
Like many industries, technology is going to beat up on this buggy whip.
I'm frankly surprised no one has come up with a grading service to technically grade coins using defined (e.g. ANA) standards, with computerized scanning. When they do, that'll be the end of crack-outs and grading swings.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
That would be a positive for the hobby.
I'd be very surprised if CU hasn't fully explored this possibility. Perhaps they feel the human eye still does a better job of grading than a computer for their types of collectibles. After all, it is our human eye that attracts us to a collectible item that we like.
PCGS spent 7 figures on R&D for computerized grading back in the early 1990's, but they ultimately decided the technology could not be developed at that time. I would maintain, even in 2018, that the technology to grade coins via AI is impossible. At least for classic coins with an infinite range of strike details, post-mint wear/damage, etc. However, it should be pretty easy for a computer to grade modern coins in 69/70 with a very specific set of tolerance for imperfections. The problem will always be that grading classic coins is an art, not science.
Whitman Brands: President/CEO (www.greysheet.com; www.whitman.com)
PNG: Executive Director (www.pngdealers.org)
Wasn’t that what PCGS and NGC we’re originally doing (supposedly)? They have also always maintained that grading was consistent. I was always under the impression that the TPGS
utilized the market grading concept later to increase revenues as a service like the one you describe would go under quickly
Yep. I doubt that a computer would do very well with eye appeal.
Eye appeal is in the eye of the beholder and there are many, many beholders. What's a computer to do?
Or just drop EA from the equation and let the buyer decide what suits his taste/s. How would that print be subtracted from EA in Wayne's thread. The AI would only be as good the opinion of the person setting up the system.
This.
It would be the EA that would establish the price for a particular coin.
All 65's should grade the same but not all be worth the same.
+1
Kinda like it is now at times. If a computer said a coin was ms63 and you showed it to 20 different professional graders, I wonder how many would agree that the computer got it right.
>
There are two big problems with this. First, you have to be able to teach the computer what the "ground truth" is with respect to scoring eye appeal. This is not easy in a domain like eye appeal where if you ask 9 different experts, you get 10 different answers. Second, you have to be able to have the input to the computer match what the eye sees. This includes lighting, tipping the coin around in the luster, and using both eyes. Sure you can simply say "scan" it, but that scan has to contain all the information you and I see, and it has to be repeatable.
AI probably has a role in classifying real vs. artificial toning, assuming that it is given a lot of ground truth data from which it can perform with both high sensitivity and high selectivity.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Clearly, AI can't assess "eye-appeal," since the very term asserts subjectivity. Any AI system for technical grading would properly ignore eye appeal, and leave that to the tastes of the collector as to its market value.
Technical grading is an entirely different matter. One can program in criteria: number of hits, location of the blemishes, hairlines, etc. The criteria obviously needs to be agreed upon and set by humans in concert who would be responsible for refinement, but the standards should then be permanently set, and loosening/tightening should be a thing in the past. PCGS already has Secure, which establishes a permanency to the coin's identity, and which can be absorbed into such a system.
And yes, the model would greatly harm such a company's bottom line, as coins once graded would theoretically stay graded, and resubmissions would drastically decline.
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
LOL
I don't know. How is the currency market these days? CLCT's grading revenues from currency grading fees are down. The bills are all serialized so it's harder to have "fresh" currency come on the market. All this does is bifurcate the market even further.
Which is why it will never happen. The shifts from tight grades, to loose, back to tight, and so on drives for revenues for the TPGs. However as a collector, the recent period of gradeflation really ruined it for me. I cut back on my purchases greatly and I didn’t have the time or the interest to play the crackout game.
Pretty sure grades have nothing to do with it. Fewer collectors, fewer submissions. Coin prices tell us everything we need to know. Stock price reacting accordingly.
Maybe, maybe not. Models can be fine tuned to adapt to the needs to change them, whether as a result of actual errors in results or a redefinition of the ground truth.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I watch the stock and the financials. I can tell you the company is not covering the dividend with cash flow from operations. When this occurs the smart investors dump the shares as the dividend will be reduced or suspended. Last I saw was an 8% cash yield from the current dividend. If this is not a sell sign nothing is.
There is no free lunch or accidental high yield in this situation. Divide the dividend by the stock price and multiply the product by 100 and you will get the cash yield. CLCT is over four times the S&P.
There is a hook in this one.
Never grab a falling knife.
It's up 6+% this am to $16.58.
Dead cat bounce?
Idea... how about PCGS adopt a new grading system that will help drive regrade revenues and subsequent profits?