New Proof Buffalo - I paid extra cuz it's CAC
jmlanzaf
Posts: 36,615 ✭✭✭✭✭
jmlanzaf
Posts: 36,615 ✭✭✭✭✭
jmlanzaf
Posts: 36,615 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
You didn't pay extra because its CAC---you paid extra because the coin is high end for the grade and problem free
No, I would have paid less for the same coin without the sticker...
The market is what the market is... LOL
I've actually been wanting a satin proof buffalo and that one seemed very reasonably priced. Might have been too many in the auction today, including a 68
The market always pays more for top end coins and less for low end coins.....
When you purchase top end coins you often, but not always, will pay more. When you go to sell those top end coins it can be very dicey trying to recoup the premiums. Even with stickers.
But I am talking more generally, like the op coin. If you are thinking more in the $10,000 and up coins then your generalization is probably more accurate.
Oh, @jmlanzaf I like your coin. The buffalo proofs are among my favorites.
Honestly, I was mostly kidding about the price. I've wanted to pick one up for a while, but I only bought it because it seemed cheap.
Buffs have always been my favorite US coin. And I like the satin proofs very much.
Great sticker!
I see it came with a coin.
"If I say something in the woods and my wife isn't there to hear it.....am I still wrong?"
My Washington Quarter Registry set...in progress
But they put the damn sticker over the writing on the slab. Be easier to read the slab if they put the sticker over the coin.
For patterns and varieties, I find it annoying! They should make the sticker smaller or PCGS should increase the size of the smooth label window to accommodate stickers (since they are so important in the market).
You have a nice looking well struck coin. Interesting note on these satin finish proofs is that they show more detail than the brilliant finish but are more readily available and cost less. The satin coins were struck first and it was originally thought that brilliant coins would not bring up the design well. A deeper look into Roger's Renaissance volume will reveal reasons why.
By the way, JA didn't like my NGC Pf 67 coin enough and I sure cannot see why.
Nice sticker... Not sure about the coin as I was just in total awe of the label region and figured why even bother looking lower
Sweet proof buff.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Why is that coin not a 68? In hand can you guess what holds it back?
It's easier to recognize top end coins with CAC. You may be able to get a better deal without CAC because even if the coin is the same, less people may recognize it as a high end coin. It's in a Gen 6.0 holder without a plus after all.
Gorgeous coin! Nice pics too
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
That is a dynamite proof! Congratulations!
That's a beauty for sure. The sticker is the glaze on the Dunkin
Very Very attractive Buff with or without the bean
Congrats
That's depressing.
High grade proof Buffs are a good value at today's prices imo, especially compared to recent years. Most are attractive, scarce-not impossible-even the early matte proofs-in a very populsr and collectible series.
It is.
That's silly. The market for everything is always what the market is. If the market depresses you, don't buy anything.
What depresses me most is the constant battle over this stuff. It's like a never ending story.
I can't offer a solution.............OH YES I CAN!
Stay out of it.
Pete
That’s a beautiful buffalo
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/washington-quarters-major-sets/washington-quarters-date-set-circulation-strikes-1932-present/publishedset/209923
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/washington-quarters-major-sets/washington-quarters-date-set-circulation-strikes-1932-present/album/209923
That is a very, very nice Buff.... What a great addition to your collection... to anyone's collection I should add.... Cheers, RickO
jmlanzaf, did you buy the coin sight-unseen or did you view it in-hand??
that is a nice coin and it seems clear from the pictures why it isn't a PR68. I would pose a question to the OP: what do you think everyone would have said about the coin if only the two large pictures had been show, no slab picture?? members just don't want to accept that the sticker changes perception and causes prices to rise. the coin pictured is the same with/without the sticker, why does it cost more with the sticker??
we each have to answer that question for ourselves.
I bought it sight-unseen which is why the sticker is important. Frankly, it's also why the slab itself is important.
Honestly, I felt like the price was pretty low actually. I paid $1575. Heritage just sold two 67 CACs in the last 3 months at $2400 and $3000 (toned). They sold one in August of last year at $1560. But, since I'm likely to sell it sight unseen, the slab/sticker remains relevant and DOES effect value. Not because of what it is worth as a coin to me, but because it gave me confidence as the buyer and because it will give confidence to the next buyer. That is really what 3rd party opinions were meant to be all about.
I am old enough to remember when third party grading and slabbing entered the scene in a big way in the 80's it was
billed or advertised as a way to confidently buy sight unseen coins with confidence that they were as graded.
That has long since changed.
so I have another question based on your reply: Has the market changed, or is the market changing, so much that a PCGS slab and the attendant grade guarantee is no longer meaningful?? Is the perception now that an additional assessment is needed for buyer confidence??
Apparently yes. I have seen people obsess over stickers on sub $200 coins.
I have seen other evidence of the "change" taking place.
in the past it was more common to have a collection that was predominantly raw or at least partially raw, but when it came time to sell the suggestion was the same: get everything encapsulated. that appears to have morphed into "send everything to CAC" before you sell. I don't fully grasp the reasons.
I understand the former concept since a TPG like PCGS or NGC can offer a way to identify problems while they also assess the grade.
You don't have to "grasp the reasons."
I predicted this a year and a half ago and now I'd just shorten my time a bit.
Few agree with me. The myriad "reasons" posted cheerfully skip over the elephant in the room and ascribe the "market weakness" to everything from demographics to stock market connections. All of which DO affect prices, but the "name that shall not be mentioned" is ignored.
Nuff said. Wait a little longer. Logic WILL show up eventually.
I buy plenty of CACless slabs sight unseen. But a second opinion is a second opinion. And the market is what the market is.
If a CAC 67 widget sells for $100 and a 67 no CAC sells for 80, then i'm going to buy the CAC at 80 to 85 and the no CAC at 65. Even if it is the identical coin. It's the market.
Now, if there is a coin I really want for myself and it's worth $100 to me to add to my collection, then I play $100 whether it is CAC, no CAC, or raw sight seen. [Raw sight unseen would have to be cheaper. ]
It's just logical and reasonable and lacks any of the innuendo people want to throw into a CAC discussion.
If a doctor wanted to amputate your leg, would you not be more likely to agree if you had a second (or third or fourth) opinion?
If a realtor told you that putting flowers in the window box could add $1000 to the purchase price, would you insist that the house was the same with our without the flowers?
I think demographics play a huge role. I watched the stamp market slide. I am not one of those who believe that "coins are not stamps" or "coins are money".
Collectible coins are collectibles, just like stamps. Intrinsic value only puts a floor under the price. So my $1600 proof buffalo will always be worth a nickel. Of course, a mint $5 columbian stamp has a $5 floor of you want to use it for postage. But that intrinsic value didn't keep the price from dropping from $5000 to $1000.
This is true. Of course, I've also seen people on this forum paying $30 to submit $50 (max) coins for encapsulation. Neither position is wholly logical or reasonable.
As I already mentioned. On a $200 widget, if the CAC matches it worth $20 more in the market, i'll pay $18 more to acquire it. But I'd still buy the CACless coin.
The PCGS slab and the CAC for me really relate to market value only. They have little to do with collectibility. Personally, I would much rather have a pretty AU coin for $100 than an ugly 63 CAC for $500. But I will pay more for the 63 CAC to resell because the Market is King, and I'm just the court jester.
I think the market has changed as it will always change. But in addition I believe that other issues are also at play.
You hear countless times how in the old days buyers were ripped off by dealers who bought your coin as an AU and sold it as an MS coin. Now I'm sure this occurred but the logical remedy would be to learn how to grade yourself or simply put buy or sell for what the coin actually is. If a dealer tried to sell you an AU for MS money just walk away. But the easier answer was to all just rely on a third party assessment and not learn or trust your own judgment. Not learn being the key.
As more and more coins got encapsulated the game got easier....just shut up and read the label.
You know how many times you heard oh no the coin isn't AU, the label says MS63.
It got to the point that if a coin was raw there must be something wrong with it. Just read these boards.
We might have reached the point where an additional assessment is needed because the primary grading....the one
done by the buyer/seller ... is no longer considered, or even being done.
I understand sight unseen buying for investment purposes......the reason given for many third party grading companies to begin with is still viable, but it morphed into the general hobby.
Investing in coins is different than collecting coins. Pure and simple.
Now do we want a decent return on our purchases, of course, but here is where paying AU money for an AU coin comes into play and if you can't tell the difference between AU and MS you are losing money based on your inabilities and it is just easier for most to be able to blame/trust/rely on someone else.
all the examples of Doctors and houses sound logical, here's what makes sense to me --- when I was working as a machinist and needed hand tools, wrenches-sockets-screwdrivers, etc., I always bought Craftsmen. they were reasonably priced, had a lifetime guarantee and the stores were all around me. at the same time, there would always be guys who put their money of MAC tools or Snap On and would buy off the traveling salesman in the big fancy truck that showed up every 1-2 weeks. those guys always had a fancy name for my stuff, Crapman being the most used. strangely, they weren't above borrowing my stuff if they needed it and thought their tools with the lifetime guarantee were OK to pay double for.
it didn't make sense then and it doesn't make sense now. I was paying $59 for a wrench set guaranteed for life, they were paying $129 for a wrench set guaranteed for life!! my tools rarely broke or failed, whenever they did I had a brand new one the next day.
I can find no logical reason except money to explain why otherwise smart collectors have bought into the CAC game. it is as though a small group(how many, about 12) of dealers conceived an idea to defraud collectors and those same collectors agreed that it was a sound scheme. they went along willingly.
in its simplicity the CAC idea is genius --- pay me $10 a coin and I'll guarantee a return of multiples of that when you sell. the dealer group supporting the idea worked us over like a prize fighter starting with the top of the market and moving down. all dealers around the country(most of whom aren't really good graders) needed to see was some history of stickered coins selling for more money and they were all-in!! currently, just like in the late 90's with TPG's, there is a big push to have everything go to CAC. the two things, the advent of TPG's and the current state of CAC are strikingly similar to me. the latter almost mirroring the former, though maybe a little faster.
all the while collectors nod their heads as though it is a good, good thing, please let me pay more for my coins!!
Actually a complete set of the regular issue proof buffs should include
1913 type one
1913 type two
1914
1915
1916
(all above are mattes)
1936 satin finish
1936 brilliant finish
1936 satin-brilliant hybrid finish
1937 brilliant finish
1937 brilliant finish, cameo.
The 1936 satin-brilliant hybrid has not caught on, is very rare, and has not been recognized by pcgs or ngc.
Note that no 1936 brilliant finish cameo buffs have shown up or have been certified.
You would think that a few 36 cameo proof buffs would have shown up by now.
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
Very, very nice. Great looking buff for sure👍🏻👍🏻👌🏻
There's very few Coins I seriously want anymore, but a nice "36 Proof Buffalo is one of them. Congratulations on that Beauty you picked up. One day, maybe soon, I'll need to get off my cheap streak and spend a little.
👌
Honestly, there is much in the coin market that I don't find "logical" - meaning it doesn't appeal to me. However, this rather sinister plot seems a bit over the top.
You want a genius (sinister?) idea: registry sets. I personally find it madness to pay huge sums for "condition rarities" of modern coins that exist uncirculated in bag quantities. I think it is madness to pay more for a 69 than a 68 when most professional graders probably would waiver on the distinction in many cases. BUT BUT BUT, it is always dangerous to think that you are right and The Market is wrong.
The Market represents the collective wisdom of participants. Now, even rational markets are prone to overcorrect. And a day may come when an MS70 1st strike modern coin is a face value widget. Or, a day may come when only the wealthiest can afford an MS69 1989-D cent. Or, something in between. But, often our individual disagreements with the market are not based on any rational argument but simply personal preference or even nostalgia.
Your Craftsman analogy can actually be used to argue FOR TPGS and CAC. Craftsman tools had a TPGS guarantee. Throw in a Yelp review (CAC) as to actual quality and you have a PCGS/CAC tool.
But I seek not to defend either PCGS or CAC (or any other 3rd party opinion). I simply recognize that the collective wisdom of The Market embraces both as having meaning and value. I could get angry about it and yell that those young whippersnappers are buying the coins I want to buy at higher prices than I want to pay because they have PCGS/CAC. Or I could decide to live in The Market as it exists or simply exit The Market as no longer serving my needs.
To return to my Proof Buffalo. Without PCGS/CAC, I don't own that coin today. I would have had to travel to Baltimore to view it or bother one of my dealer friends to view it for me. I'd have to decide if I trusted my dealer on the assignment of grade as 66 or 66+ or 67 or 67+ or 68. I'd have to decide what the "safe" price is for the raw 66 or 67 or 68 and possibly lose that coin to someone in Baltimore with a better eye than my dealer friend who is confident enough to go high end 67. Instead, I got to stay home and go to my day job. Throw up a winning bid on the internet and acquire a coin type I've been wanting for a little while. To all the anti-CACers, why is that a bad thing?
Congratulations on the Beautiful coin!
Good to know. Next.
That's really nice!
My YouTube Channel