If coins have rims to make them easier to count by stacking then why can't bank tellers count them in stacks? why don't mint put more effort in making them the same thickness each year.
@WingedLiberty1957 said:
Why do some ebay sellers put really high BIN prices on coins? Then when you ask them they offer it for 1/2 price.
Listen to this crazy story. Earlier this year an ebay seller had a nicely toned 1925-S Lincoln PCGS MS64BN (Guide around $400 I think) listed at $2000. I offered him $900 (which was really stretching high IMHO) which he rejected. He then countered $1200, which I passed on. Then he relisted it for $2800 BIN ($800 higher than it was before I made my offer). A few months later he sold it for $1200. If he was willing to sell it for $1200, why not list it at $1600 or something that was closer to his sell price. Are some sellers insane?
Sometimes sellers want to get more money than what they are willing to sell it for. All he needed was one deep pocketed collector that really liked the toning.
@mercurydimeguy said:
Why is the coin market devoid of any regulatory elements, and why do TPGs claim no liability for the professional opinion they render for a fee like a CPA or lawyer (circular reference back to the first part of the question)?
"Coins" are not "banking" or "stock brokerage", both of which are regulated (at least nominally). "Coins" is a minor subset of "Art and Antiques", which is still a Wild West kind of place.
It is very true, which makes it ironic that many dealers hype coins as investments.
@mercurydimeguy said:
Why is the coin market devoid of any regulatory elements, and why do TPGs claim no liability for the professional opinion they render for a fee like a CPA or lawyer (circular reference back to the first part of the question)?
"Coins" are not "banking" or "stock brokerage", both of which are regulated (at least nominally). "Coins" is a minor subset of "Art and Antiques", which is still a Wild West kind of place.
It is very true, which makes it ironic that many dealers hype coins as investments.
I was actually referring more to the TPG ecosystem since they manufacture the product which is later sold. The manufacturer of the product does not take on any liability for their product but consumers of their product can lose 100's of millions of dollars. If you look at what FCRA has done in areas outside of finance for example. Anyhow I find it odd that we pay a TPG for their opinion like we do a lawyer or a CPA, but we have no recourse against a TPG like we do against a CPA.
I thought of this way back when TPG was introduced and thought that by now some level of governance would be in place but there is not, and frankly I think it's a lot worse now than it was before.
Do certain (non-modern) series ever really get "hot" in todays market? I know prices of coins can and do fluctuate, but what would cause there to be a run on a particular series that otherwise has a steady collector base? Is it as simple as a few of deep pockets decide to focus on one series?
@mercurydimeguy said:
Anyhow I find it odd that we pay a TPG for their opinion like we do a lawyer or a CPA,but we have no recourse against a TPG like we do against a CPA.
That is supposedly what TPG guarantees are for (when actually honored but that is a separate issue).
@cameonut2011 said:
Why do collectors tolerate grade inflation?
Because it's really about the money anyway.
Doesn't really matter what grade is on the holder, just what it can be sold for.
TPGs do not discourage gradeflation; it ensures repeat/multiple submissions.
Just my .02 here but I think "gradeflation" simply used to be inconsistency---perhaps unintentional, perhaps partly human error, perhaps a "wink-wink" business decision to encourage the crackout game.......
I think that changed dramatically when the brilliant (from a marketing perspective) idea of Registry sets was launched.
Greed + ego ( I MUST have the best set!) = $$$$$$$
@mercurydimeguy said:
Why is the coin market devoid of any regulatory elements, and why do TPGs claim no liability for the professional opinion they render for a fee like a CPA or lawyer (circular reference back to the first part of the question)?
"Coins" are not "banking" or "stock brokerage", both of which are regulated (at least nominally). "Coins" is a minor subset of "Art and Antiques", which is still a Wild West kind of place.
It is very true, which makes it ironic that many dealers hype coins as investments.
I was actually referring more to the TPG ecosystem since they manufacture the product which is laster sold. The manufacturer of the product does not take on any liability for their product but consumers of their product can lose 100's of millions of dollars. If you look at what FCRA has done in areas outside of finance for example. Anyhow I find it odd that we pay a TPG for their opinion like we do a lawyer or a CPA,but we have no recourse against a TPG like we do against a CPA.
I thought of this way back when TPG was introduced and thought that by now some level of governance would be in place but there is not, and frankly I think it's a lot worse now than it was before.
Well, lawyers do real estate searches and then they sell title insurance policies. They sell an insurance policy to insure against their own screw-ups. They receive a commission on title insurance policy sales. I don't want to give anybody any ideas, but...
If CAC allows for re-submission and will reconsider giving a bean to a coin that they rejected the first time around, then how is CAC any better than PCGS or NGC? In theory you can re-submit until you get a bean just like you can re-submit with PCGS or NGC until you get the upgrade you want. So instead of grade-flation, we will have bean-flation (I am trademarking this now). Eventually every coin will have a green sticker because they reconsider rejects. Soon people are going to start to care about not only if it has a bean, but when it got it. Then we will need a 5th party grader to grade the CAC'ed coins with a new sticker.
@totally said:
If CAC allows for re-submission and will reconsider giving a bean to a coin that they rejected the first time around, then how is CAC any better than PCGS or NGC? In theory you can re-submit until you get a bean just like you can re-submit with PCGS or NGC until you get the upgrade you want. So instead of grade-flation, we will have bean-flation (I am trademarking this now). Eventually every coin will have a green sticker because they reconsider rejects. Soon people are going to start to care about not only if it has a bean, but when it got it. Then we will need a 5th party grader to grade the CAC'ed coins with a new sticker.
Isn't this where we are headed?
I always figured somebody would put stabbed coins in another slab. This green bean thing came out of left field. Fifth party grading! What a splendid idea!
Of course, the ultimate thing would be to send slabbed beaned slabbed coins to a Central depository and dealers and collectors would simply retain a spiffy certificate with a hologram image of the original coin and trade the certificate back and forth. Less security issues too, although eventually there would be fake hologram certificates. Sadly, this likely development is not my original idea
@totally said:
If CAC allows for re-submission and will reconsider giving a bean to a coin that they rejected the first time around, then how is CAC any better than PCGS or NGC? In theory you can re-submit until you get a bean just like you can re-submit with PCGS or NGC until you get the upgrade you want. So instead of grade-flation, we will have bean-flation (I am trademarking this now). Eventually every coin will have a green sticker because they reconsider rejects. Soon people are going to start to care about not only if it has a bean, but when it got it. Then we will need a 5th party grader to grade the CAC'ed coins with a new sticker.
Isn't this where we are headed?
I would say, "No".
The simple reason being that they don't take "anonymous" raw coins, but only identifiable by Serial Number certified coins. So while it's nice of them to reconsider, they also can have the record of past reconsiderations. The wise thing would be for them to reconsider ONCE. Every re-submission after that should be summarily rejected.
(Of course, you can always re-certify with the TPG, and submit "for the first time" again, but I have my doubts that most are that committed to the bean(?))
@totally said:
If CAC allows for re-submission and will reconsider giving a bean to a coin that they rejected the first time around, then how is CAC any better than PCGS or NGC? In theory you can re-submit until you get a bean just like you can re-submit with PCGS or NGC until you get the upgrade you want. So instead of grade-flation, we will have bean-flation (I am trademarking this now). Eventually every coin will have a green sticker because they reconsider rejects. Soon people are going to start to care about not only if it has a bean, but when it got it. Then we will need a 5th party grader to grade the CAC'ed coins with a new sticker.
Isn't this where we are headed?
I would say, "No".
The simple reason being that they don't take "anonymous" raw coins, but only identifiable by Serial Number certified coins. So while it's nice of them to reconsider, they also can have the record of past reconsiderations. The wise thing would be for them to reconsider ONCE. Every re-submission after that should be summarily rejected.
(Of course, you can always re-certify with the TPG, and submit "for the first time" again, but I have my doubts that most are that committed to the bean(?))
I agree that this would be very wise policy and put my idea to rest. Resubmitting to pcgs or ngc just to then resubmit to cac under a new serial number would be a huge pain in the butt and take a long time and have a financial cost. In my head, I think that would fix the issue (not sure if it is an issue now).
I'd also really appreciate if they posted the serials of what they don't accept at which grade. But I am not holding my breath.
@totally said:
I'd also really appreciate if they posted the serials of what they don't accept at which grade. But I am not holding my breath.
I thought about that for awhile, and determined in my little mind that it would TOTALLY change the equation.
Top Tier: Those that do have a CAC sticker.
2nd Tier: Those that were never submitted. (One could assume they COULD CAC....maybe).
3rd Tier: Those that failed CAC review.
So, the mental math would suddenly change. If you weren't ABSOLUTELY SURE that the coin will CAC, it may be in your best interest to NOT submit! The coin will forever be a "maybe".
So, fewer submissions to CAC, less impact on the market.
And those that failed? You can "upgrade" them by resubmitting to the TPG's, and getting them OFF of the failed list! (Which the TPG's would probably like. More submission money).
So, it probably SHOULDN'T happen, even if as a buyer, it might appear to be a good thing to know.....
If there's no portrait on a coin, which side is heads and which is tails? Can this change if I guess wrong when betting the house on a flip of a headless coin?
Really wasn't trying to start a debate. It was a serious dumb question. That is the title of this thread: "Ask a stupid coin question thread". I did ask a stupid coin question.
@WingedLiberty1957 ....
"Why are there so many cookers (AT'ers) of coins on ebay."
Because it is profitable... very profitable. Lots of money being paid for 'cooked' coins. As long as this foolish trend continues, so will the 'cooking' of coins. Cheers, RickO
@WingedLiberty1957 said:
Why does PCGS in almost every case list high grade RD copper at a significantly higher price than high grade BN copper -- when high grade BN copper often has a fraction of the population?
Far more desirable in RD
Frank, if you review the IHC PR Basic Registry sets you will find that 8 of the top 10 sets are based upon BN and RB coins. RD coins are assigned more registry points, ........but my set, Paha Sapa Indians, is #3 with only one RD coin. And the #2 set (D.L.Hansen ) is mostly RB and BN. Not all dates have great toned color, such as the 1871. An 1871 66RD latest auction was $8,225 and I paid close to $10,000 for my nicely toned PR66BN.
Many times the RD coins are not original and have been dipped in the past. There are very few great RD coins in the IHC PR series as many of them do not have original surfaces. RD is only desireable for original coins.
@scubafuel....Pale, (fr. pal, pl. paux, old fr. pel): considered as one of the honourable ordinaries, and may occupy one third of the width of the shield. It has two diminutives, the palet, which is one half, and the endorse(q.v.), which is by some said to be one eighth of its breadth, by others one fourth.
The term vergette is said by French writers to be one third the width of their pal. The term occurs in one or two ancient coats of arms, but it is comparatively rare.
Gules, a pale or--Arms ascribed to HUGH DE GRANDMESNIL, Lord High Steward of England, temp. HEN. I.
Cheers, RickO
In the mid-70's, a collector had two ways to sell a coin: go to a coin shop, or run an ad in the coin papers.
Now, a collector has many ways to sell a coin, incl. eBay, his/her own website, the BST Forum here, etc.
Today's collector doesn't need to run a classified ad in a coin paper to sell coins.
The Internet has had a lot more impact on the size/content of the coin papers than grade inflation.
Actually, there were more ways to sell coins. There were local auction houses (which I went to a lot to buy coins mostly and sometimes consigned coins to sell also.). You could sell them at coin clubs or coin shows. There were monthly coin club meetings. There were 2 or 3 coins shows within 50 miles of my home every month. Flea markets were another option, which I did rather frequently in the 1970's.
I mean, like it is harder now to distinguish the mint marks. A "P" can look somewhat like a "D", especially to us older folks. I have to look closely with a magnifier now to see the difference.
@WingedLiberty1957 said:
Why does PCGS in almost every case list high grade RD copper at a significantly higher price than high grade BN copper -- when high grade BN copper often has a fraction of the population?
Far more desirable in RD
Frank, if you review the IHC PR Basic Registry sets you will find that 8 of the top 10 sets are based upon BN and RB coins. RD coins are assigned more registry points, ........but my set, Paha Sapa Indians, is #3 with only one RD coin. And the #2 set (D.L.Hansen ) is mostly RB and BN. Not all dates have great toned color, such as the 1871. An 1871 66RD latest auction was $8,225 and I paid close to $10,000 for my nicely toned PR66BN.
Many times the RD coins are not original and have been dipped in the past. There are very few great RD coins in the IHC PR series as many of them do not have original surfaces. RD is only desireable for original coins.
OINK
possibly, but the Op asked "Why does PCGS in almost every case list high grade RD copper at a significantly higher price than high grade BN "
If a coin is submitted to CAC twice and it fails on the first time but stickers on the second submission is the coin still dreck, only half dreck, or now a "wow coin?"
@cameonut2011 said:
If a coin is submitted to CAC twice and it fails on the first time but stickers on the second submission is the coin still dreck, only half dreck, or now a "wow coin?"
Comments
Why are most coins round?
If coins have rims to make them easier to count by stacking then why can't bank tellers count them in stacks? why don't mint put more effort in making them the same thickness each year.
Some dealers also try to take advantage of people's innate cognitive biases:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
Look on Error Ref.com.
It is very true, which makes it ironic that many dealers hype coins as investments.
It raises the price of extremely sharp scraping blades.
I was actually referring more to the TPG ecosystem since they manufacture the product which is later sold. The manufacturer of the product does not take on any liability for their product but consumers of their product can lose 100's of millions of dollars. If you look at what FCRA has done in areas outside of finance for example. Anyhow I find it odd that we pay a TPG for their opinion like we do a lawyer or a CPA, but we have no recourse against a TPG like we do against a CPA.
I thought of this way back when TPG was introduced and thought that by now some level of governance would be in place but there is not, and frankly I think it's a lot worse now than it was before.
Do certain (non-modern) series ever really get "hot" in todays market? I know prices of coins can and do fluctuate, but what would cause there to be a run on a particular series that otherwise has a steady collector base? Is it as simple as a few of deep pockets decide to focus on one series?
That is supposedly what TPG guarantees are for (when actually honored but that is a separate issue).
I doubt it.........but the TPGs would be.
Because it's really about the money anyway.
Doesn't really matter what grade is on the holder, just what it can be sold for.
TPGs do not discourage gradeflation; it ensures repeat/multiple submissions.
Just my .02 here but I think "gradeflation" simply used to be inconsistency---perhaps unintentional, perhaps partly human error, perhaps a "wink-wink" business decision to encourage the crackout game.......
I think that changed dramatically when the brilliant (from a marketing perspective) idea of Registry sets was launched.
Greed + ego ( I MUST have the best set!) = $$$$$$$
Well, lawyers do real estate searches and then they sell title insurance policies. They sell an insurance policy to insure against their own screw-ups. They receive a commission on title insurance policy sales. I don't want to give anybody any ideas, but...
If CAC allows for re-submission and will reconsider giving a bean to a coin that they rejected the first time around, then how is CAC any better than PCGS or NGC? In theory you can re-submit until you get a bean just like you can re-submit with PCGS or NGC until you get the upgrade you want. So instead of grade-flation, we will have bean-flation (I am trademarking this now). Eventually every coin will have a green sticker because they reconsider rejects. Soon people are going to start to care about not only if it has a bean, but when it got it. Then we will need a 5th party grader to grade the CAC'ed coins with a new sticker.
Isn't this where we are headed?
Successful transactions with: wondercoin, Tetromibi, PerryHall, PlatinumDuck, JohnMaben/Pegasus Coin & Jewelry, CoinFlip, and coinlieutenant.
I always figured somebody would put stabbed coins in another slab. This green bean thing came out of left field. Fifth party grading! What a splendid idea!
Of course, the ultimate thing would be to send slabbed beaned slabbed coins to a Central depository and dealers and collectors would simply retain a spiffy certificate with a hologram image of the original coin and trade the certificate back and forth. Less security issues too, although eventually there would be fake hologram certificates. Sadly, this likely development is not my original idea
I would say, "No".
The simple reason being that they don't take "anonymous" raw coins, but only identifiable by Serial Number certified coins. So while it's nice of them to reconsider, they also can have the record of past reconsiderations. The wise thing would be for them to reconsider ONCE. Every re-submission after that should be summarily rejected.
(Of course, you can always re-certify with the TPG, and submit "for the first time" again, but I have my doubts that most are that committed to the bean(?))
I agree that this would be very wise policy and put my idea to rest. Resubmitting to pcgs or ngc just to then resubmit to cac under a new serial number would be a huge pain in the butt and take a long time and have a financial cost. In my head, I think that would fix the issue (not sure if it is an issue now).
I'd also really appreciate if they posted the serials of what they don't accept at which grade. But I am not holding my breath.
Successful transactions with: wondercoin, Tetromibi, PerryHall, PlatinumDuck, JohnMaben/Pegasus Coin & Jewelry, CoinFlip, and coinlieutenant.
I thought about that for awhile, and determined in my little mind that it would TOTALLY change the equation.
Top Tier: Those that do have a CAC sticker.
2nd Tier: Those that were never submitted. (One could assume they COULD CAC....maybe).
3rd Tier: Those that failed CAC review.
So, the mental math would suddenly change. If you weren't ABSOLUTELY SURE that the coin will CAC, it may be in your best interest to NOT submit! The coin will forever be a "maybe".
So, fewer submissions to CAC, less impact on the market.
And those that failed? You can "upgrade" them by resubmitting to the TPG's, and getting them OFF of the failed list! (Which the TPG's would probably like. More submission money).
So, it probably SHOULDN'T happen, even if as a buyer, it might appear to be a good thing to know.....
Somehow, almost every "gereral" thread eventually turns into yet another CAC debate thread. Stupid question: why should that be?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Sorry for my participation.
Maybe a new "Internet Rule: Numismatics Category" needs to be stated.
"If active long enough, any numismatic discussion will eventually degrade to a discussion of CAC, and die after 150 to 250 more posts".
IDK if this was already asked, but how many times can a TPG claim "mechanical error" before we all call BS?
eBay ID-bruceshort978
Successful BST:here and ATS, bumanchu, wdrob, hashtag, KeeNoooo, mikej61, Yonico, Meltdown, BAJJERFAN, Excaliber, lordmarcovan, cucamongacoin, robkool, bradyc, tonedcointrader, mumu, Windycity, astrotrain, tizofthe, overdate, rwyarmch, mkman123, Timbuk3,GBurger717, airplanenut, coinkid855 ,illini420, michaeldixon, Weiss, Morpheus, Deepcoin, Collectorcoins, AUandAG, D.Schwager.
What do you mean these coin price tables aren't the same things as daily stock (equity) price listings?
Paper or Plastic?
Was thinking the same thing.
Really wasn't trying to start a debate. It was a serious dumb question. That is the title of this thread: "Ask a stupid coin question thread". I did ask a stupid coin question.
Successful transactions with: wondercoin, Tetromibi, PerryHall, PlatinumDuck, JohnMaben/Pegasus Coin & Jewelry, CoinFlip, and coinlieutenant.
@WingedLiberty1957 ....
"Why are there so many cookers (AT'ers) of coins on ebay."
Because it is profitable... very profitable. Lots of money being paid for 'cooked' coins. As long as this foolish trend continues, so will the 'cooking' of coins. Cheers, RickO
How many angels can stand on the edge of a Reeded Edge Bust Half Dollar?
- Jim
What are "Pale Gules" and how the heck do you pronounce that anyway?
Frank, if you review the IHC PR Basic Registry sets you will find that 8 of the top 10 sets are based upon BN and RB coins. RD coins are assigned more registry points, ........but my set, Paha Sapa Indians, is #3 with only one RD coin. And the #2 set (D.L.Hansen ) is mostly RB and BN. Not all dates have great toned color, such as the 1871. An 1871 66RD latest auction was $8,225 and I paid close to $10,000 for my nicely toned PR66BN.
Many times the RD coins are not original and have been dipped in the past. There are very few great RD coins in the IHC PR series as many of them do not have original surfaces. RD is only desireable for original coins.
OINK
@scubafuel....Pale, (fr. pal, pl. paux, old fr. pel): considered as one of the honourable ordinaries, and may occupy one third of the width of the shield. It has two diminutives, the palet, which is one half, and the endorse(q.v.), which is by some said to be one eighth of its breadth, by others one fourth.
The term vergette is said by French writers to be one third the width of their pal. The term occurs in one or two ancient coats of arms, but it is comparatively rare.
Gules, a pale or--Arms ascribed to HUGH DE GRANDMESNIL, Lord High Steward of England, temp. HEN. I.
Cheers, RickO
.
>
Actually, there were more ways to sell coins. There were local auction houses (which I went to a lot to buy coins mostly and sometimes consigned coins to sell also.). You could sell them at coin clubs or coin shows. There were monthly coin club meetings. There were 2 or 3 coins shows within 50 miles of my home every month. Flea markets were another option, which I did rather frequently in the 1970's.
Ok, now for my dumb question. Why did "P" mint marks suddenly become necessary in 1980 on all denominations except for the cent?
I mean, like it is harder now to distinguish the mint marks. A "P" can look somewhat like a "D", especially to us older folks. I have to look closely with a magnifier now to see the difference.
possibly, but the Op asked "Why does PCGS in almost every case list high grade RD copper at a significantly higher price than high grade BN "
BHNC #203
If a coin is submitted to CAC twice and it fails on the first time but stickers on the second submission is the coin still dreck, only half dreck, or now a "wow coin?"
half dreck
BHNC #203
Should i be buying my DMPL Morgans off Ebay from the one guy that has 20" mirrors or the other guy that has 24" mirrors?
Usually 4 inches more is good thing, right?