Legend Market Report: PRE LONG BEACH REPORT
bronzemat
Posts: 2,666 ✭✭✭✭✭
0
bronzemat
Posts: 2,666 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Maybe they should just stay home and wait for everyone to mail them boxes full of MS67 CAC Morgans for only $675 each when the same coins are supposedly a great buy for us collectors at $900 each
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
Which one is better:
1) Common Date Morgan $1 PCGS MS67 CAC
2) Common Date Morgan $1 NGC MS67 CAC
By the Legend report, looks like PCGS MS67 CAC is better than NGC MS67 CAC. I'm right or wrong?
<< <i>I'm looking to buy one of these. Please help me to choose which one is better.
Which one is better:
1) Common Date Morgan $1 PCGS MS67 CAC
2) Common Date Morgan $1 NGC MS67 CAC
By the Legend report, looks like PCGS MS67 CAC is better than NGC MS67 CAC. I'm right or wrong? >>
Your best move would be to avoid buying common date anything.
I am surprised they do not put back coins for many years that they see as way undervalued. They make enough to put back 10 million or more in coins. Every week, every month is always better than the last.
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>Try NOT to read the accompanying Hot Topics!
I succumbed to RYK's tease about the latest Hot Topics and read same. The topic was a five-year "Reflection About CAC."
Although I have never submitted coins to CAC, I have purchased some that are stickered and think that the service has been a positive influence on the hobby. As I am building my collections (although I do occasionally sell one to free-up funds for a coin that I want more), I see no compelling reason to send my coins to New Jersey.
One of Laura's statements offers some hope that my strategy may not be excessively risky. Quoting her from the Hot Topics article, "It's clear cut without a single instance to prove otherwise, CAC coins bring more money than NON CAC coins (unless you have a fresh old time once graded major collection).
I would like to think that my collections fall into the category described in the latter portion of Laura's quote. I still still think it's nice for a carefully assembled collection to leave something to the imagination.
The MS 65 CAC and above market is very strong, no question about that. Do you know how difficult it is to find these coins even at big shows near these bids that are being put out? The owners are right to believe that the bids will just increase because the populations with their well-heeled owners are in no hurry to sell them. This also goes for classic rarities in the $5K and above price range. The demand is high and availability is low.
Enjoyable reading as always.
You don't ever have to send your coins to NJ. But if you or anyone owns or has owned lower end or even average coins for the grade that didn't/won't sticker, then you've been affected.
The crush has been most notable on "other than PCGS" slabbed coins where 4 figure and up MS65/PF65 coins have been generally decimated. CAC has been good for CAC and those who deal mostly in CAC coins....or collectors who own nearly all high end coins. For everyone else, not so good. Sorry, but I don't see the correlation between rarer date choice/gem MS gold and the price of bullion. With that logic rare date gold should have been off the charts in August of last year at $1900/oz+ gold....it wasn't. It's probably still true that the strongest point in the rare date gold market occurred back in 2008 or even in 2006 when gem generics and type peaked (Indian $5's in MS65-66, $3's in 64-66, etc.). Choice/gem rarer date gold is still much more closely linked with the rare coin market....not the gold bullion market.
<< <i>Although I have never submitted coins to CAC, I have purchased some that are stickered and think that the service has been a positive influence on the hobby. As I am building my collections (although I do occasionally sell one to free-up funds for a coin that I want more), I see no compelling reason to send my coins to New Jersey.
You don't ever have to send your coins to NJ. But if you or anyone owns or has owned lower end or even average coins for the grade that didn't/won't sticker, then you've been affected.
The crush has been most notable on "other than PCGS" slabbed coins where 4 figure and up MS65/PF65 coins have been generally decimated. CAC has been good for CAC and those who deal mostly in CAC coins....or collectors who own nearly all high end coins. For everyone else, not so good. Sorry, but I don't see the correlation between rarer date choice/gem MS gold and the price of bullion. With that logic rare date gold should have been off the charts in August of last year at $1900/oz+ gold....it wasn't. It's probably still true that the strongest point in the rare date gold market occurred back in 2008 or even in 2006 when gem generics and type peaked (Indian $5's in MS65-66, $3's in 64-66, etc.). Choice/gem rarer date gold is still much more closely linked with the rare coin market....not the gold bullion market. >>
You make excellent points, and I am getting to the point where I do not like my "A" coins being held back by the "B" coins that are also stickered by the CAC. I think that we may need an additional service to make the distinction. I
<< <i>
<< <i>Although I have never submitted coins to CAC, I have purchased some that are stickered and think that the service has been a positive influence on the hobby. As I am building my collections (although I do occasionally sell one to free-up funds for a coin that I want more), I see no compelling reason to send my coins to New Jersey.
You don't ever have to send your coins to NJ. But if you or anyone owns or has owned lower end or even average coins for the grade that didn't/won't sticker, then you've been affected.
The crush has been most notable on "other than PCGS" slabbed coins where 4 figure and up MS65/PF65 coins have been generally decimated. CAC has been good for CAC and those who deal mostly in CAC coins....or collectors who own nearly all high end coins. For everyone else, not so good. Sorry, but I don't see the correlation between rarer date choice/gem MS gold and the price of bullion. With that logic rare date gold should have been off the charts in August of last year at $1900/oz+ gold....it wasn't. It's probably still true that the strongest point in the rare date gold market occurred back in 2008 or even in 2006 when gem generics and type peaked (Indian $5's in MS65-66, $3's in 64-66, etc.). Choice/gem rarer date gold is still much more closely linked with the rare coin market....not the gold bullion market. >>
You make excellent points, and I am getting to the point where I do not like my "A" coins being held back by the "B" coins that are also stickered by the CAC. I think that we may need an additional service to make the distinction. I
I thought your collection included platinum stickers?
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
reasonable value, where a non-stickered average for grade coin either doesn't sell or gets a below market price.
But how to value the really high end for grade coins is still difficult. It may or may not plus, and unless you are expert
in the series, it is not an easy task to convince the next buyer of the quality that exists in the "A" coin.
BTW, I do not submit to CAC, nor do I rely on them when I buy. I understand why many do, and the service is effective for newer
collectors.
<< <i>I tend to feel like RYK has indicated-- a solid for grade coin with a sticker may get the coin sold for
reasonable value, where a non-stickered average for grade coin either doesn't sell or gets a below market price. >>
The sticker would appear to be working if a not-solid for the grade coin gets sold for below market price.
Exactly. It served certain dealers while reducing the value of the holdings of the unwashed by de-legitimizing the grading opinion of the TPGs.
Here are a few of my favorite Hot Topic gems:
"The last major change, was the advent of 3rd party grading. You would think it would have cured 95% of all that could ill the hobby. Nope! In fact, it currently is contributing to the hobbies ills-and
virtually no dealers will publically (or even privately) speak up against the services or any other issues. The services definately have made a grab to control the coin business with their influence.
They certainly have become the 300 pound gorrillas, but now even the public is growing tired of their strong armed tactics of control and domination."
"These guys simply rule the numismatic world-at least in their minds. They do so by paying sponsorships to all the groups who are supposed to police us (I have always felt that NO group like
an ANA or PNG should EVER sell a sponsorship to ANYONE)! Besides, they recreated the standards (old holders are much tighter graded), and then allowed for todays gradeflation problems to happen."
"No one dares speak negative to them-they have dealers living in fear. The grading services are now part of the ruling elite in the business who almost seem "above the law"."
"You should NEVER in this day and age, even with all the TPG;'s saying it is ok to do so, buy ANY coin sight UNSEEN unless its from someone you would trust with your life! You always MUST have eye appeal, techinical grade, and most important these days-the coin must be UNMESSED with."
"Except for the TPG's, no one would argue that there are problems. I NEVER see any (Saints) properly graded by ANY service anymore."
"Do NOT give in and buy a coin because it is in a piece of plastic which may be marketed as the best."
Here's a gem from another forum:
"I told David Hall a year ago to FIRE THE GRADERS and the head finalizer. Its time for fresh eyes. Its not like this is a big secret."
There are many more similar examples of comments intended to de-legitimize the TPGs' opinion. Some will argue that the promotion of a 4th party service benefits the market and answers a fundamental problem with the TPGs. By de-legitimizing the TPG opinion of the balance of the market, the 4th party service has reduced the value of the majority of the holdings of many collectors. They hold the bulk of collectible coins, and are the victim of tightening standards. Depending on which view you take, you'll either see the comments above as aimed at de-legitimizing the TPGs to improve the hobby or as political--intended to de-legitimizing the TPGs to promote self-interests. In either case, the goal and outcome has been to de-legitimize the TPGs opinion by suggesting it is insufficient to inform a purchase decision.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i> By de-legitimizing the TPG opinion of the balance of the market, the 4th party service has reduced the value of the majority of the holdings of many collectors. They hold the bulk of collectible coins, and are the victim of tightening standards. >>
Very eye opening statements with a lot of truth in them, I'm afraid....
Collectors and dealers were beginning to 'de-legitimize' TPG opinions before CAC appeared on the scene. People were placing increasing emphasis on what holder (e.g., PCGS Rattler or NGC fattie) a coin was in and expecting premiums for coins in certain early holders. CAC did not start this mess.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
<< <i>I'm looking to buy one of these. Please help me to choose which one is better.
Which one is better:
1) Common Date Morgan $1 PCGS MS67 CAC
2) Common Date Morgan $1 NGC MS67 CAC
By the Legend report, looks like PCGS MS67 CAC is better than NGC MS67 CAC. I'm right or wrong? >>
Don't see mention of NGC - But paying 850-900 for a common date morgan is an absurdity - a nice 63-65 will do to fill that slot and they are so much cheaper! At that money would rather find a nice DMPL. If their buy price is 675 on the 67's and they are getting 850-900 - thats a markup of around 26-30%. I just wonder if there are even that many retail buyers at that on the bourse at Long Beach LOL. What a nice cash cow that must be for them if they can churn them like that. I like their marketing brochure, its a great model if your considering a "newsletter" for your business and how to market certain types of mostly generic material. Be aware, that just because a coin has a CAC sticker that is no guarantee you will like the coin if buying sight unseen nor a potential buyer will wither. There is no substitute for ones own grading skills, numismatic expertise or seeing a coin in person sight seen.
For what they are probably asking for a 67 morgan I think a Star Spangled Unc $5 Gold from the US Mint (at $495) for a lot less is what I would buy. A unc ASE from the USM in presentation case is only $45 and its probably a 70. Does the expensive US Classic Gold Legend is touting really have investment potential vs bullion gold? I question this - show me how these have performed since Jan 1. Also - what percentage premium are you paying over CDN Bid on the Classic US Gold they offer vs Bullion gold on the bourse, ebay, etc.? I know the answer - do you?
There is no doubt they have an impressive inventory and if they can market many of those big ticket items (key date Saints for example) to coin buyers for what a nice car or boat would cost well kudos to them.
<< <i>
<< <i> By de-legitimizing the TPG opinion of the balance of the market, the 4th party service has reduced the value of the majority of the holdings of many collectors. They hold the bulk of collectible coins, and are the victim of tightening standards. >>
Very eye opening statements with a lot of truth in them, I'm afraid.... >>
BS. I'm no longer a CAC shareholder, so I'm speaking freely. The vast majority of nice coins for the grade are in collections - therefore collectors reap the lion's share of the benefit from CAC.
While I think the pendulum has swung too far as far as the price differential, there are other factors at play as well. The services tightened and introduced the + grade. Now, instead of a low end unstickered 65 at $10k, you are seeing a high end stickered 64+ at $8k and saying you can't afford to pay that when regular 64s are $5k.
Bottom line is collectors are getting more bang for their buck in both directions - provided they heeded the advice of collecting the best coin for the grade that they could.
I'd imagine that's true. However, it misses the point. The vast majority of coins are not nice for the grade, and collectors hold an inordinate share of all coins. By definition, most coins are average. At least as many are liner for the grade as are PQ. If you would argue that CAC has helped those with nice coins for the grade, what impact would you say it has had on the marketability of those coins that are in TPG plastic and won't sticker?
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>"The vast majority of nice coins for the grade are in collections - therefore collectors reap the lion's share of the benefit from CAC."
I'd imagine that's true. However, it misses the point. The vast majority of coins are not nice for the grade, and collectors hold an inordinate share of all coins. By definition, most coins are average. At least as many are liner for the grade as are PQ. If you would argue that CAC has helped those with nice coins for the grade, what impact would you say it has had on the marketability of those coins that are in TPG plastic and won't sticker? >>
I disagree with your premise that the vast majority of coins are not nice for the grade. I would say that the vast majority of coins ARE nice [ie: solid] for the grade. As far as those that are doctored or blatantly overgraded - sorry, but those were worth much less than the grade on the holder already.
While the disparaty between stickered and non stickered is growing, most of that is due to an INCREASE in the price for stickered combined with stagnation for those not stickered.
<< <i>I would say that the vast majority of coins ARE nice [ie: solid] for the grade. >>
Ergo, the "vast majority" of coins deserve a sticker. So, why are people willing to pay a premium?
You mentioned the doctored and blatantly over-graded coins in TPG holders, but surely not all coins that fail to sticker are blatantly over-graded or doctored. What has happened to the below average (in the opinion of the 4th party service) or liner coins? Has the saleability of these coins been negatively impacted by the emergence of the new service? Do dealers hold most of these coins?
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
<< <i>
<< <i>I would say that the vast majority of coins ARE nice [ie: solid] for the grade. >>
Ergo, the "vast majority" of coins deserve a sticker. So, why are people willing to pay a premium? >>
For the liquidity? And the assurance the coin hasn't been doctored. Or the reassurance that the coin is indeed one of those that is solid for the grade? All of the above?
Now it is plastic and stickers- The Post CAC, Plus designations and secure plus the impact of plastic and so called condition rarities that are 67 and better-
What happened to the coins, the various series, the design and history behind it all?
And in another thread, there was a question about the future of the hobby.
Can we get back to coins? You know- what is actually in the plastic?
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I would say that the vast majority of coins ARE nice [ie: solid] for the grade. >>
Ergo, the "vast majority" of coins deserve a sticker. So, why are people willing to pay a premium? >>
For the liquidity? And the assurance the coin hasn't been doctored. Or the reassurance that the coin is indeed one of those that is solid for the grade? All of the above? >>
"All of the above" accounts for my CAC only collection.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
Fairly right on point ... like that PCGS-PR68 Liberty nickel with a CAC sticker that recently sold at auction for $28,750! At the same time, a non-CAC example in the same auction (a few lots apart) even graded higher at PCGS-PR68CAM failed to sell at about $13,000.
Not to mention, a recent PCGS coin I handled where the "+" added about $100,000 to the roughly $250,000 price realized at auction. Well worth the $500 submission fee.
Myriad more examples.
Wondercoin
<< <i>Not to mention, a recent PCGS coin I handled where the "+" added about $100,000 to the roughly $250,000 price realized at auction. Well worth the $500 submission fee. >>
Sorry, not sure how you can make such an open ended statement.
Was the coin all there? If so, it probably made both the under bidder and the winner go strong for the coin whether or not if the slab had a “+” on it. To say that the “+” was the reason for the high bids is just foolish, you will never know how much the bids would have been without it. It is just as likely that the under bidder if he saw the coin “in hand” would have made the winning bidder pony up the same amount. You could have just as easy unnecessarily wasted the $500 fee.
While CAC has a place in the hobby-especially in high grade coins as reflected in your example- why not post pictures of the auction lots and whether there is really $15K difference in the two?
It might just be that both coins are worthy of the grade and the only that sold for $28K has a look that even a CAC sticker would not help in boosting its appeal. Lets see alittle analysis in terms of the coins, the holders so one can really appreciate the difference.
The sad part of this is that examples such as this seem misplaced without actually seeing what is in the plastic.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
My own experiences in the MS gem bust-barber-seated world of the 2009-2012 era, is that stickering has destroyed far more value that it has created, esp. for non-PCGS coins,
which is at least half the slabbed coin market. While one would think that picking the better coins for the grade would have been enough, yet it wasn't if you happened to choose
nice NGC coins....even if those were equiv/better than similarly graded PCGS coins. The fact that something less than 50% of gem 18th and 19th century type coins sticker suggests that
the majority of slabbed coins are at best ok for the grade or low end or worse. And those coins are held mostly by collectors and investors, some dealers as well (who are only
temporary caretakers until they place them with a client). Let's not even go into the stickering rate for gem $10 and $20 gold coins which is off the charts low. Yeah, like Legend said,
it is very hard to find a stickerable MS67 $20 Saint, and for good reason. MS bust halves and $20's specifically have probably some of the lowest rates of stickering. One cannot readily compare those rates to Merc dimes, Walkers, or Morgans. If anyone knows the current MS65 or 66 $20 Saint stickering rate please mention it.
Picking nice/stickered/stickerable gem 19th century NGC silver type coins will net you a 15-30% discount to PCGS when it's time to sell. I don't see that as being a win-win for collectors. You pay nearly the same price up front when buying (after all they're stickered), but suffer a fat hit on resale. I would have to agree with the concept of deligitimizing the TPG's has been a boon to a small segment of the hobby. While looser grading got this going years before stickering materialized, it has been the stickering process that has nailed the coffin shut, at least for non-PCGS coins. TDN argues the opposite side of this but how many NGC coins were in his seated or trade dollar sets? I've been saying for a while now that the priority is now 1. holder. 2. sticker. 3. coin itself. 5 yrs ago it was 3. and then 1. But even then it took a slightly nicer NGC coin to fetch the same money as a PCGS holdered coin. Those preaching 3. "coin first" are still looking out for themselves by generally ensuring that those coins are also 1. and 2.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I would say that the vast majority of coins ARE nice [ie: solid] for the grade. >>
Ergo, the "vast majority" of coins deserve a sticker. So, why are people willing to pay a premium? >>
For the liquidity? And the assurance the coin hasn't been doctored. Or the reassurance that the coin is indeed one of those that is solid for the grade? All of the above? >>
Nice dodge of the question. I thought the original impetus for stickers was the "sea of dreck" in holders.
Now you claim that the "vast majority" of slabs are "nice (solid)" for the grade. Have the services really
bought back most of their inventory in the meantime?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I would say that the vast majority of coins ARE nice [ie: solid] for the grade. >>
Ergo, the "vast majority" of coins deserve a sticker. So, why are people willing to pay a premium? >>
For the liquidity? And the assurance the coin hasn't been doctored. Or the reassurance that the coin is indeed one of those that is solid for the grade? All of the above? >>
Nice dodge of the question. I thought the original impetus for stickers was the "sea of dreck" in holders.
Now you claim that the "vast majority" of slabs are "nice (solid)" for the grade. Have the services really
bought back most of their inventory in the meantime? >>
CAC stickers reflect solid for the grade. Only low for the grade doesn't sticker. MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I would say that the vast majority of coins ARE nice [ie: solid] for the grade. >>
Ergo, the "vast majority" of coins deserve a sticker. So, why are people willing to pay a premium? >>
For the liquidity? And the assurance the coin hasn't been doctored. Or the reassurance that the coin is indeed one of those that is solid for the grade? All of the above? >>
Nice dodge of the question. I thought the original impetus for stickers was the "sea of dreck" in holders.
Now you claim that the "vast majority" of slabs are "nice (solid)" for the grade. Have the services really
bought back most of their inventory in the meantime? >>
There is a sea of dreck on the marketplace. And the vast majority of slabs are correctly graded. And collectors own the vast majority of nice for the grade coins. Perhaps, if you put your mind to it you can actually figure out that all those statements are consistent.
Could it be that most nice for the grade coins quickly enter collections while the dreck builds up in dealer inventory? Gasp!
Of course, there are no absolutes in life. Anything is possible. I could have reserved the coin without the "+" (assuming I never submitted it for the "+") for $100,000 less and the bidders could have run it up $100,000 over the opening bid. Certainly possible.
But, it is my opinion, that the pop 1/0 status of the coin (after it received the "+" from PCGS) added close to $100,000 to the sales price. If someone argued it was only $75,000, I might not argue that much. Suffice it to say it was substantial.
As always, just my 2 cents.
A separate comment coming soon on a related subject.
Wondercoin
<< <i>Wondercoin >>
Sent you a PM about LB.
<< <i>There is a sea of dreck on the marketplace. And the vast majority of slabs are correctly graded. And collectors own the vast majority of nice for the grade coins. Perhaps, if you put your mind to it you can actually figure out that all those statements are consistent.
Could it be that most nice for the grade coins quickly enter collections while the dreck builds up in dealer inventory? Gasp! >>
The crux of the issue is whether stickering has been more of a financial boon for dealers or collectors.
Since you are the former and I am the latter, it's unlikely we'll reach agreement on the answer.
My $100,000 increase raised the sales price from $150,000 to $250,000 in my example (about a 65% increase). Even at $75,000 extra for the "+", the increase was 50%.
But, in the series I collect (silver Washington quarters) ... we have seen the "+" recently raising the value of certain coins by HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF PERCENT... EVEN IN EXCESS OF 1000% AT TIMES. For example, the 1944(p) Quarter in MS67+ that recently sold at auction for about $8,000 that is worth around $500 without the "+". That's a $7,500 increase on a $500 coin.
Anyway, the market is what the market is .... both for "+" graded coins at PCGS and for CAC stickered coins in a multitude of coin series and especially in the top grades.
Just my 2 cents
Wondercoin
I am just telling it like it is (in my view) ... I have never sent a coin to CAC ever, except when auctioning them off for customers (where the auction company sends certain coins over to CAC at my request). I strive to get my customers the very best price possible on their coins. My job is not to fully understand the psychology and metaphysics of why folks pay what they do for coins ... my job is to try to get my customers top dollar for their holdings (and submitting for the "+" or to CAC is always being factored into my analysis).
Wondercoin
<< <i>I don't consider myself a dealer. I am a high end collector who happens to back a coin company. >>
Well and good, but IMO the bulk of your posts on this forum are written from the perspective of
an interested financial party in the business. That you no longer have a direct financial stake in the
sticker business hardly makes you a disinterested party when your coin business markets and
promotes exclusively coins with stickers.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I would say that the vast majority of coins ARE nice [ie: solid] for the grade. >>
Ergo, the "vast majority" of coins deserve a sticker. So, why are people willing to pay a premium? >>
For the liquidity? And the assurance the coin hasn't been doctored. Or the reassurance that the coin is indeed one of those that is solid for the grade? All of the above? >>
Nice dodge of the question. I thought the original impetus for stickers was the "sea of dreck" in holders.
Now you claim that the "vast majority" of slabs are "nice (solid)" for the grade. Have the services really
bought back most of their inventory in the meantime? >>
A sea, while big, is still nowhere near as big as an ocean
There's a big difference between "many," "most," and the "vast majority." Even if there are many coins that can be called dreck, they may still be the minority of all certified coins.
which is at least half the slabbed coin market. While one would think that picking the better coins for the grade would have been enough, yet it wasn't if you happened to choose
nice NGC coins....even if those were equiv/better than similarly graded PCGS coins.
From my experience in rare date gold, NGC caused problems for coins in NGC holders long before the CAC was active with a significant loosening of grading standards, augmented by the NCS conservation service. See my thread on the Duke's Creek collection for one very telling data set. NGC has since tightened, but the period of loosening has tainted collector perception, again, at least in the rare date gold arena. It might take some time before NGC are widely considered to be graded on par with PCGS--maybe a very long time--and that has nothing to do with the CAC. From what I can tell, the CAC is blind to the TPG. Perhaps it is different in the type coin area.
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't consider myself a dealer. I am a high end collector who happens to back a coin company. >>
Well and good, but IMO the bulk of your posts on this forum are written from the perspective of
an interested financial party in the business. That you no longer have a direct financial stake in the
sticker business hardly makes you a disinterested party when your coin business markets and
promotes exclusively coins with stickers. >>
Actually, my view has been that the vast majority of TDN's posts have been from the perspective of a collector, a collector that cares enough about coins to speak up on important issues.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't consider myself a dealer. I am a high end collector who happens to back a coin company. >>
Well and good, but IMO the bulk of your posts on this forum are written from the perspective of
an interested financial party in the business. That you no longer have a direct financial stake in the
sticker business hardly makes you a disinterested party when your coin business markets and
promotes exclusively coins with stickers. >>
Actually, my view has been that the vast majority of TDN's posts have been from the perspective of a collector, a collector that cares enough about coins to speak up on important issues. >>
At some level, I think that there are few 'disinterested parties'---many of us have 6-7 figures tied up in our coin collections. I am purely a collector, and have almost never seen a post by TDN that I seriously disagree with. And if CAC destroyed a lot of value in some niche coin markets, it makes me wonder what people [thought they] were buying in the first place. As a large cent collector, I don't see CAC having a major influence on this part of the coin market.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
I have read TDN posts for 11 years he is a asset to the Message Boards and the Hobby. He has great insight into the high end of the market.
In God We Trust.... all others pay in Gold and Silver!