I don't think anyone would disagree that the price should reflect quality, and premium quality coins should bring a premium proportional to the quality of the coins. The problem is that minor (subjective) differences in quality are translating into disproportional price increases (or decreases depending on the way you look at it) for hair-splitting differences. Moreover, in this particular example, the value was presented not as a metric of the coin's quality (the coin is the same in all of the examples) but whether the OP could get it into his preferred plastic with a CAC sticker. If the coin is PQ and at the same level as a PCGS CAC example, it should sell for a similar price regardless of the holder or sticker. This is not the way the information is presented. If plastic and stickers make that much difference, the difference in value is of the plastic and not the coin. Maybe I'm odd, but then again, my interest is in collecting coins and not speculating on the most recent fads with stickers and the like.
@scubafuel said:
But CAC is NOT what dictates that price. The coin dictates the price as it always has, and dictates CAC as well.
The coin should absolutely dictate the price, but the perception is that it is not the driving force between many of the price differences. If the coin is the determining factor, then why is it that a NGC coin can sell at auction only to reappear in a PCGS holder with a CAC sticker for a huge increase only a short time later? The difference is the plastic/sticker. Prices shouldn't be that fickle. As for CAC and the services, inconsistency is a major issue. Coins routinely upgrade and a number of CAC rejects have found stickers later. Would the price spikes in those coins be due to the coins or the plastic? If the coin is all there, it will eventually end up in the "right" holder even if it takes a few attempts. Maybe it is me, but I would be concerned having substantial sums of money invested in a certified coin that is worth a mere pittance outside of the plastic tomb.
For example, a problem free MS65 "C" quality coin should not sticker. In some cases, it may sell for less than a MS64 "B" quality coin of the same issue that does sticker. Why should a true 65- be worth less than a middle of the line (but solid) 64 if the eye appeal is comparable? That doesn't make sense to me. This does not sound healthy.
The irony here, is that such a system basically existed before CAC. Maybe the pricing variation wasn't always this extreme but it has always been there. Let's take a look at something like a MS65 Seated Dollar. Let's go back to summer 2008 in the pre-CAC era at the high of the coin market.
Whoa! Stop right there!
Out of context but the essence of the angst.
Essentially that says that coins were rising in price (so I assume popularity) until
CAC
Ushered in the decline.
"Essentially that says that coins were rising in price (so I assume popularity) until CAC Ushered in the decline."
It's obvious that your misinterpreting what was said? RR continues to give detailed examples to illustrate his opinions, you clearly disagree, no need to twist what he said.
I believe threads like this are healthy, they help us examine current trends and explore overall strategies related to prices, grading, collecting style, etc. Each of us is free to choose how, when, where, and what we collect, buy, sell, or trade. Individually we do not determine collecting trends and preferences of the market, the market does. Therefore, it's good to debate and analyze then choose to follow all, some, or none, of these trends and preferences.
I especially appreciate those veteran dealers and collector who share their experiences and opinions so that I can learn from them.
I was trying to say that there may be a trigger effect with the coincidence of a peak occurring and a seemingly causative possibility of CAC initiating a decline in the fun of collecting.
Speaking ONLY personally, I am changing my entire approach to this issue.
I know the fun is passing for me.
@topstuf said:
I was trying to say that there may be a trigger effect with the coincidence of a peak occurring and a seemingly causative possibility of CAC initiating a decline in the fun of collecting.
Speaking ONLY personally, I am changing my entire approach to this issue.
I know the fun is passing for me.
Really? Only because you let it. I don't care if my chopmark trade dollars are CAC, nor my rattler 65RB 1909 Cent set. It's only on my more expensive items that it becomes an issue. I'm certain that you can find a niche to still have enjoyment in the hobby.
Which weil known saying?
"It's the slab, stupid"
"Caveat emptor"
"The first loss is the best loss"
"Buy the coin, not the grade, plastic, hype, fad, temporary condition, etc"
"Get while the gettin's good"
"Coins are not an 'investment'"
"We guarantee the grade"
"Who needs this?"
"May I have some more, sir?"
Don't worry. I'll still enjoy coins. Maybe fewer and quite likely not US coins, but the itch will still get scratched.
I have quite large fluctuations in my bullion stash so can be a bit forgiving of some minor adjustments in the numismatics.
And..... looking at coins like cars.....well, they can depreciate.
And we all didn't keep our '69 Camaros.
@topstuf said:
I was trying to say that there may be a trigger effect with the coincidence of a peak occurring and a seemingly causative possibility of CAC initiating a decline in the fun of collecting.
Speaking ONLY personally, I am changing my entire approach to this issue.
I know the fun is passing for me.
Really? Only because you let it. I don't care if my chopmark trade dollars are CAC, nor my rattler 65RB 1909 Cent set. It's only on my more expensive items that it becomes an issue. I'm certain that you can find a niche to still have enjoyment in the hobby.
yep.
Like enjoying "2 more years to live" as opposed to "well, I think you have 6 months."
A question though.
If ALL your coins were SOMEHOW rendered WAY less marketable through some as yet unknown factor, would it in any way impact your ....enjoyment?
I know YOUR enjoyment is magnitudes distanced from most, but still.
All my stuff became way less liquid as soon as the Pogues decided to sell. Yes, it has caused some angst...but I'm still enjoying it and buying stuff as it comes available....and still 'overpaying'
Not everything declined when CAC was formed. There's been a top 5-20% of all coins that have continued to move higher after they bottomed out in 2010-2011. I'd say the very best PCGS-CAC coins have often increased in value since 2011. I can't say that for non-stickered slabbed coins or even NGC-CAC coins. I discussed the idea of when CAC showed up (Nov 2008) and the market declining in the "other" CAC thread. TDN's sets are all PCGS and probably mostly stickered....hence further insulated from out-of-favor market whims. He knew all that back when he started his sets.
The Pogue's didn't have gem MS seated or trade dollar sets so I think in the long run, TDN's sets will be just fine. They are in the best plastic possible and incomparable condition. That really floats FAR above all these discussion threads. And those coins don't need plastic to explain their value. If plastic disappeared tomorrow he'd still own the most incredible dollar sets on the planet....while 80-90% of high dollar slab owners will be running for cover.
But it occurs to me that this is a lot of angst about an area of the market that MOST of us would never participate in to begin with!
IF you are spending ten's of thousands for a truly rare coin in extreme condition, and IF the value fluctuates as much as suggested, then YES....by all means you need a CAC sticker, the right holder, advice of your coin advisor, independent opinions from several area experts, years of experience, permission from your wife, and maybe a discussion with your financial advisor.
On the other hand, many (most?) of us buy "what we are comfortable with". We spend money that isn't required for other life requirements. We buy in a grade range that has many examples to choose from. We buy what our own experience says are acceptable buys, with acceptable risk. The price fluctuation is NOT extreme. That's where the "Fun Is" for most of us. Finding a nice looking VF, or AU coin. Coins that fit our budget, and fit our asthetic desires.
Heck, if my coin collection dropped in value by 50% tomorrow.....I'd still have a coin collection that appeals to me. Market be damned. (No, I wouldn't be happy about that, but I wouldn't be devastated either). No doubt, there is a clunker or two in my collection somewhere, whether I realize it or not, but in aggregate I'm confident the coins are what I think they are. I can liquidate at, say, 75% of what I spent, and would have done better than if I had spent the money on 5000 rounds of golf.
The "fun" is still in collecting if you let it be there. Heck, even the guys who stretch into higher priced coins, or are spending to the extreme of $100,000 coins, are having "fun", or they wouldn't be doing it! It's just at a different level, and with different requirements. We each just settle into our own levels of risk/reward.
I'm fairly well set as an upper-middle class guy. I guess I COULD be spending $1000's on each coin, and stressing the risk that goes with that. But I choose not to. I spend in the low $100's on each coin. I do it my way, and don't even feel the requirement to "check with the wife". My collection, my choice.
I don't feel the need to question those who play the game at a much higher level, (in price, and risk). Have at it. I get a certain amount of joy just watching you.
@topstuf said:
I was trying to say that there may be a trigger effect with the coincidence of a peak occurring and a seemingly causative possibility of CAC initiating a decline in the fun of collecting.
Speaking ONLY personally, I am changing my entire approach to this issue.
I know the fun is passing for me.
Really? Only because you let it. I don't care if my chopmark trade dollars are CAC, nor my rattler 65RB 1909 Cent set. It's only on my more expensive items that it becomes an issue. I'm certain that you can find a niche to still have enjoyment in the hobby.
@tradedollarnut said:
All my stuff became way less liquid as soon as the Pogues decided to sell. Yes, it has caused some angst...but I'm still enjoying it and buying stuff as it comes available....and still 'overpaying'
But, if you're not thinking of selling in the next 6-18 months, why would Pogue-induced liquidity issues concern you and your sets? And already mentioned, the Pogues didn't have the coins you have, in particular seated/trade dollars. I can see an effect on your bust dollar set though as the Pogues were loaded with bust coinage.
Ok. Pogues, Simpson, The Fund AND Gardner all stopped or slowed buying within a six month period. The top of the market became illiquid- illiquidity is ALWAYS a concern
@tradedollarnut said:
Ok. Pogues, Simpson, The Fund AND Gardner all stopped or slowed buying within a six month period. The top of the market became illiquid- illiquidity is ALWAYS a concern
Hold it a minute. Hasn't Legend always stated that they have orders for $30 MILL to $60 MILL in coins and just can't find them. I've seen that stated numerous times over the past 5-10 years. Never enough good coins, always enough money though. Lots of other dealers state that same thing fairly often. Didn't have Pogue/Newman/Gardner and others offer up that much or more? Are all those orders now filled? So there no longer is enough money, and there are too many good coins floating around?
That was my point. Those major collections including Newman had to have $100 MILL or more in those "certain" coins that are just not normally available.
@topstuf said:
I was trying to say that there may be a trigger effect with the coincidence of a peak occurring and a seemingly causative possibility of CAC initiating a decline in the fun of collecting.
Speaking ONLY personally, I am changing my entire approach to this issue.
I know the fun is passing for me.
Really? Only because you let it. I don't care if my chopmark trade dollars are CAC, nor my rattler 65RB 1909 Cent set. It's only on my more expensive items that it becomes an issue. I'm certain that you can find a niche to still have enjoyment in the hobby.
topstuf is what he is.
While that statement is obviously TRUE, what do you think it means?
Is it in the context of the pseudo neoshrinks who use ..."IT IS WHAT IT IS"..... as their attempt to assert some philosophical "edge" that their subject is just too dumb to see?
It's ambiguous unless you can define HOW you mean such a statement.
If you notice, even Bruce admits to "some" ....angst.
Is "angst" a desirable element in the joys of collecting?
topstuf thinks it isn't.
Of COURSE TDN doesn't care if his chopmarked $T1 s are stickered.
That's like saying he doesn't care if his pocket change is.
It's all in degrees. We all know that.
I, too, will not be devastated by a drop in "value" of my collection.
I'd be a fool if I was overcomitted financially by hog wlld willy-nilly coin buying.
My collection is far more modest than his. My "biggest" coin is 5 figures.
ALL the rest are less.
Do I "let" it affect me? Of course. It would take a fool not to be affected.
What's the solution? Why, IGNORE any negative influence of the new "standard." Sure, try NOT to say it is actually GRADING the piece. That's pretty naive.
Part....a LARGE part.... of collecting is having faith in the service you paid for to assist you in what YOU may not be confident enough to evaluate. What's left out is the erosion of what you paid for to affirm the original "history in your hands." If the already GRADED coin is not the "end" then it's of no value in the first place.
topstuf is what he is and so is TDN and so are you.
@topstuf said:
I was trying to say that there may be a trigger effect with the coincidence of a peak occurring and a seemingly causative possibility of CAC initiating a decline in the fun of collecting.
Speaking ONLY personally, I am changing my entire approach to this issue.
I know the fun is passing for me.
Really? Only because you let it. I don't care if my chopmark trade dollars are CAC, nor my rattler 65RB 1909 Cent set. It's only on my more expensive items that it becomes an issue. I'm certain that you can find a niche to still have enjoyment in the hobby.
topstuf is what he is.
While that statement is obviously TRUE, what do you think it means?
Is it in the context of the pseudo neoshrinks who use ..."IT IS WHAT IT IS"..... as their attempt to assert some philosophical "edge" that their subject is just too dumb to see?
It's ambiguous unless you can define HOW you mean such a statement.
If you notice, even Bruce admits to "some" ....angst.
Is "angst" a desirable element in the joys of collecting?
topstuf thinks it isn't.
Of COURSE TDN doesn't care if his chopmarked $T1 s are stickered.
That's like saying he doesn't care if his pocket change is.
It's all in degrees. We all know that.
I, too, will not be devastated by a drop in "value" of my collection.
I'd be a fool if I was overcomitted financially by hog wlld willy-nilly coin buying.
My collection is far more modest than his. My "biggest" coin is 5 figures.
ALL the rest are less.
Do I "let" it affect me? Of course. It would take a fool not to be affected.
What's the solution? Why, IGNORE any negative influence of the new "standard." Sure, try NOT to say it is actually GRADING the piece. That's pretty naive.
Part....a LARGE part.... of collecting is having faith in the services you pay for to assist you in what YOU may not be confident enough to evaluate. What's left out is the erosion of what you paid for to affirm the original "history in your hands."
topstuf is what he is and so is TDN and so are you.
This response of yours is exactly what I mean (above.) You enjoy a touch of self-pity and indulging in a ton of introspection (as do I, but I think not as much as yourself.) In fact, I'll probably do some navel-gazing this evening. My biggest coins are five figures mostly -- when you include the decimal point. But truth be told, I think I own perhaps two 4-figure coins and a whole slew of stuff worth much less than 3 figures. And I am happy doing so -- probably extremely happy, to be accurate -- not to have to sweat what CAC does and does not do for my coins, instead being able to learn from these threads without having monetary skin in the game.
Well I for one do appreciate getting TDN's views, which are candid and not just marketing-speak. Losing Pogues, Gardner, Newman certainly had to have an effect on high end coins. You don't quickly replace some of those pockets (and I am not even counting what Mr. Simpson is doing as I am not sure).
As another example, if Gerald Forsythe up and sells his Buffalos and Walkers and Mercuries, what effect will that have on those markets? Having such a kingpin in a popular series provides a lot of comfort for the markets of those coins right up until he sells everything.
One thing I would mention is it is interesting that in whatever coin TDN was looking at, he valued CAC over crossover. I think that is fair but the power of the registry is often underestimated. PCGS's registry program has been a huge boon to its brand and has really hurt a lot of NGC coins.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
@tradedollarnut said:
I valued CAC over crossover because I fully believe that if I like it and JA likes it that eventually it will cross
Is that like saying She's ugly now but after we're married she might look okay?
I think it's truly disturbing how much "faith" people put in one guy.
Competition is good for buyers, no matter the market. If it truly does end up being a PCGS-CAC "monopoly of opinions", it's not good for the average or even the above average collector. It's a great money maker for dealers, crack-out artists, and PCGS -- but it's not good for the hobby for people to be so enamored by the (non-static) opinions of two completely subjective services.
-Brandon -~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- My sets: [280+ horse coins] :: [France Sowers] :: [Colorful world copper] :: [Beautiful world coins] -~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Once upon a time, people collected coins and put them in a box or a pouch and looked at them once in a while for fun.
Then somebody poked some holes in boards and made a nice way to see more coins much easier and enjoy the activity on a pleasant evening over a cup of mead or something.
This went on for quite a long while until somebody came over to share the experience with the guy who had the neat board full of coins.
This stranger said, "Urk!...That coin not look like real coin."
And thus the collector began to wonder.
Hundreds of years passed with no progress from this primitive status.
Then a company came along...(business got invented).... and said, "Hey guys, WE will look at your coins and tell you if they are real or not. _ Unless we're not sure._"
What a relief from doubt was the emergence of this new thing.
Then, seeing the sanskrit on the wall, another company said, "Hey, let's go another step further and not only tell people if their coins are real, but also put them in a rock or something to keep anyone else from messing with them.
And so it came to pass that peace reigned throughout the land.
Collectors of coins relaxed and enjoyed their coins in the evenings when they weren't drinking or carousing at the riverbank.
and...THEN.....
Some guy sidled up to the contented collectors and said...... he said...... oh yes, he did say...,** "HOW CAN YOU BE SURE?"**
And peace departed the land and all was not good again.
So it came to pass that the coin collectors finally said, "HOLY SMOKES! WTF are we doing? Are we SAPS?"
The same was the case with the 1792 half disme at heritage that sold for 497k USD as PCGS 66, its the same that sold for 520k USD as PCGS 65 one year before - and I never liked the coin myself. I bought the green holder PCGS 66 ex Hays that sold at Stacksbowers some years ago for 793k USD.
Another very good example are the two PCGS 66 1813 half eagles that sold at Pogue, one brought 130k the other one brought 230k, although the 230k one was graded 66+.
Nice pick-up on that dime. The exact same price realized as a PCGS not-CAC 67 as a PCGS/CAC 66 16 months ago. Interesting. Have you seen it in-hand yet? Do you feel it deserved the bump to 67?
Yes... coins are a business.... Whenever, wherever, there is profit to be made, someone - no, many someone's - will jump in to garner the wealth. And, when 'someone' figures out a way to get MORE wealth, that, too, will be instituted. This should surprise no one. It was a business even before TPG and FPG's.... So, unless you only collect from pocket change, people are forced into, at least, the buying portion of the business. Basic insecurity, will often lead some into the grading game.... However, most who take those further steps are looking for monetary gain.... not a bad thing, but definitely business more than hobby. Cheers, RickO
@privaterarecoincollector said:
What Im seeing is also that the coinholders dont matter so much anymore regarding the price of the coin, in some cases not at all.
It's probably the case that not having Gene Gardner and others around to help the bidding, things are finding a softer level. Most higher level seated set owners would know the coin upgraded and factor that into their bidding. If this coin were still in the same 66 holder from 2 yrs ago, it probably would have sold for closer to $10K-$12K than the present $14K. When it comes to type coins, PCGS MS67 almost always trumps PCGS MS66 CAC by a good margin. So it probably did get "some" $ help from the 67 holder. It was likely CAC'd last time around as 66....not this time as a 67.
Market participants have caught on to grade bumps....and may not be willing to reward those players with significant profits any longer....unless it can sticker. Coin holders still do matter. Would this coin have realized the same $14K in an NGC M67 holder?
@privaterarecoincollector said:
What Im seeing is also that the coinholders dont matter so much anymore regarding the price of the coin, in some cases not at all.
.....
The same was the case with the 1792 half disme at heritage that sold for 497k USD as PCGS 66, its the same that sold for 520k USD as PCGS 65 one year before - .....
Yes, the current issue of Coin World has a full page article on the comparative auction sales of the half disme to which you make reference.
Bump for a very thought-provoking discussion. I have plenty of raw coins (mostly early coppers) that I bought that way, coins in NGC or PCGS holders, coins that I removed from their slabs, and coins in slabs with CAC stickers on them. A few of them are in slabs with 'optimistic' grades, in my opinion. Have Forum members deliberately cracked out a coin, believed to be overgraded, and then resubmitted it in the hope that it comes back at a lower grade (to improve liquidity)?
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
can I tell you the thought's that this thread provoked in me, a month short of three years later?? it is that the same members that talked like they knew what they were talking about three years ago still talk like that. they never learn, they never consider that other members know more than them. during the interim the members who really do have a knowledge base to post from have backed off or become silent altogether.
why is it so hard for certain members to just shut up and try to listen??
Comments
I don't think anyone would disagree that the price should reflect quality, and premium quality coins should bring a premium proportional to the quality of the coins. The problem is that minor (subjective) differences in quality are translating into disproportional price increases (or decreases depending on the way you look at it) for hair-splitting differences. Moreover, in this particular example, the value was presented not as a metric of the coin's quality (the coin is the same in all of the examples) but whether the OP could get it into his preferred plastic with a CAC sticker. If the coin is PQ and at the same level as a PCGS CAC example, it should sell for a similar price regardless of the holder or sticker. This is not the way the information is presented. If plastic and stickers make that much difference, the difference in value is of the plastic and not the coin. Maybe I'm odd, but then again, my interest is in collecting coins and not speculating on the most recent fads with stickers and the like.
The coin should absolutely dictate the price, but the perception is that it is not the driving force between many of the price differences. If the coin is the determining factor, then why is it that a NGC coin can sell at auction only to reappear in a PCGS holder with a CAC sticker for a huge increase only a short time later? The difference is the plastic/sticker. Prices shouldn't be that fickle. As for CAC and the services, inconsistency is a major issue. Coins routinely upgrade and a number of CAC rejects have found stickers later. Would the price spikes in those coins be due to the coins or the plastic? If the coin is all there, it will eventually end up in the "right" holder even if it takes a few attempts. Maybe it is me, but I would be concerned having substantial sums of money invested in a certified coin that is worth a mere pittance outside of the plastic tomb.
For example, a problem free MS65 "C" quality coin should not sticker. In some cases, it may sell for less than a MS64 "B" quality coin of the same issue that does sticker. Why should a true 65- be worth less than a middle of the line (but solid) 64 if the eye appeal is comparable? That doesn't make sense to me. This does not sound healthy.
Whoa! Stop right there!
Out of context but the essence of the angst.
Essentially that says that coins were rising in price (so I assume popularity) until
CAC
Ushered in the decline.
What a suck !
What ever happened to "Buy the coin, not the holder"?
"Essentially that says that coins were rising in price (so I assume popularity) until CAC Ushered in the decline."
It's obvious that your misinterpreting what was said? RR continues to give detailed examples to illustrate his opinions, you clearly disagree, no need to twist what he said.
I believe threads like this are healthy, they help us examine current trends and explore overall strategies related to prices, grading, collecting style, etc. Each of us is free to choose how, when, where, and what we collect, buy, sell, or trade. Individually we do not determine collecting trends and preferences of the market, the market does. Therefore, it's good to debate and analyze then choose to follow all, some, or none, of these trends and preferences.
I especially appreciate those veteran dealers and collector who share their experiences and opinions so that I can learn from them.
Happy Collecting!
I was trying to say that there may be a trigger effect with the coincidence of a peak occurring and a seemingly causative possibility of CAC initiating a decline in the fun of collecting.
Speaking ONLY personally, I am changing my entire approach to this issue.
I know the fun is passing for me.
Really? Only because you let it. I don't care if my chopmark trade dollars are CAC, nor my rattler 65RB 1909 Cent set. It's only on my more expensive items that it becomes an issue. I'm certain that you can find a niche to still have enjoyment in the hobby.
You should have continued "the well known saying" in your post title to include the rest of the phrase. It would have been fine......
Which weil known saying?
"It's the slab, stupid"
"Caveat emptor"
"The first loss is the best loss"
"Buy the coin, not the grade, plastic, hype, fad, temporary condition, etc"
"Get while the gettin's good"
"Coins are not an 'investment'"
"We guarantee the grade"
"Who needs this?"
"May I have some more, sir?"
Don't worry. I'll still enjoy coins. Maybe fewer and quite likely not US coins, but the itch will still get scratched.
I have quite large fluctuations in my bullion stash so can be a bit forgiving of some minor adjustments in the numismatics.
And..... looking at coins like cars.....well, they can depreciate.
And we all didn't keep our '69 Camaros.
yep.
Like enjoying "2 more years to live" as opposed to "well, I think you have 6 months."
A question though.
If ALL your coins were SOMEHOW rendered WAY less marketable through some as yet unknown factor, would it in any way impact your ....enjoyment?
I know YOUR enjoyment is magnitudes distanced from most, but still.
Would it?
All my stuff became way less liquid as soon as the Pogues decided to sell. Yes, it has caused some angst...but I'm still enjoying it and buying stuff as it comes available....and still 'overpaying'
Then lets get richer and copyright the term, "Numismasochist."
Not everything declined when CAC was formed. There's been a top 5-20% of all coins that have continued to move higher after they bottomed out in 2010-2011. I'd say the very best PCGS-CAC coins have often increased in value since 2011. I can't say that for non-stickered slabbed coins or even NGC-CAC coins. I discussed the idea of when CAC showed up (Nov 2008) and the market declining in the "other" CAC thread. TDN's sets are all PCGS and probably mostly stickered....hence further insulated from out-of-favor market whims. He knew all that back when he started his sets.
The Pogue's didn't have gem MS seated or trade dollar sets so I think in the long run, TDN's sets will be just fine. They are in the best plastic possible and incomparable condition. That really floats FAR above all these discussion threads. And those coins don't need plastic to explain their value. If plastic disappeared tomorrow he'd still own the most incredible dollar sets on the planet....while 80-90% of high dollar slab owners will be running for cover.
That's encouraging news.
I skimmed....
But it occurs to me that this is a lot of angst about an area of the market that MOST of us would never participate in to begin with!
IF you are spending ten's of thousands for a truly rare coin in extreme condition, and IF the value fluctuates as much as suggested, then YES....by all means you need a CAC sticker, the right holder, advice of your coin advisor, independent opinions from several area experts, years of experience, permission from your wife, and maybe a discussion with your financial advisor.
On the other hand, many (most?) of us buy "what we are comfortable with". We spend money that isn't required for other life requirements. We buy in a grade range that has many examples to choose from. We buy what our own experience says are acceptable buys, with acceptable risk. The price fluctuation is NOT extreme. That's where the "Fun Is" for most of us. Finding a nice looking VF, or AU coin. Coins that fit our budget, and fit our asthetic desires.
Heck, if my coin collection dropped in value by 50% tomorrow.....I'd still have a coin collection that appeals to me. Market be damned. (No, I wouldn't be happy about that, but I wouldn't be devastated either). No doubt, there is a clunker or two in my collection somewhere, whether I realize it or not, but in aggregate I'm confident the coins are what I think they are. I can liquidate at, say, 75% of what I spent, and would have done better than if I had spent the money on 5000 rounds of golf.
The "fun" is still in collecting if you let it be there. Heck, even the guys who stretch into higher priced coins, or are spending to the extreme of $100,000 coins, are having "fun", or they wouldn't be doing it! It's just at a different level, and with different requirements. We each just settle into our own levels of risk/reward.
I'm fairly well set as an upper-middle class guy. I guess I COULD be spending $1000's on each coin, and stressing the risk that goes with that. But I choose not to. I spend in the low $100's on each coin. I do it my way, and don't even feel the requirement to "check with the wife". My collection, my choice.
I don't feel the need to question those who play the game at a much higher level, (in price, and risk). Have at it. I get a certain amount of joy just watching you.
topstuf is what he is.
But, if you're not thinking of selling in the next 6-18 months, why would Pogue-induced liquidity issues concern you and your sets? And already mentioned, the Pogues didn't have the coins you have, in particular seated/trade dollars. I can see an effect on your bust dollar set though as the Pogues were loaded with bust coinage.
Ok. Pogues, Simpson, The Fund AND Gardner all stopped or slowed buying within a six month period. The top of the market became illiquid- illiquidity is ALWAYS a concern
Hold it a minute. Hasn't Legend always stated that they have orders for $30 MILL to $60 MILL in coins and just can't find them. I've seen that stated numerous times over the past 5-10 years. Never enough good coins, always enough money though. Lots of other dealers state that same thing fairly often. Didn't have Pogue/Newman/Gardner and others offer up that much or more? Are all those orders now filled? So there no longer is enough money, and there are too many good coins floating around?
You can ALWAYS sell certain coins
You can't always sell what's available
That was my point. Those major collections including Newman had to have $100 MILL or more in those "certain" coins that are just not normally available.
While that statement is obviously TRUE, what do you think it means?
Is it in the context of the pseudo neoshrinks who use ..."IT IS WHAT IT IS"..... as their attempt to assert some philosophical "edge" that their subject is just too dumb to see?
It's ambiguous unless you can define HOW you mean such a statement.
If you notice, even Bruce admits to "some" ....angst.
Is "angst" a desirable element in the joys of collecting?
topstuf thinks it isn't.
Of COURSE TDN doesn't care if his chopmarked $T1 s are stickered.
That's like saying he doesn't care if his pocket change is.
It's all in degrees. We all know that.
I, too, will not be devastated by a drop in "value" of my collection.
I'd be a fool if I was overcomitted financially by hog wlld willy-nilly coin buying.
My collection is far more modest than his. My "biggest" coin is 5 figures.
ALL the rest are less.
Do I "let" it affect me? Of course. It would take a fool not to be affected.
What's the solution? Why, IGNORE any negative influence of the new "standard." Sure, try NOT to say it is actually GRADING the piece. That's pretty naive.
Part....a LARGE part.... of collecting is having faith in the service you paid for to assist you in what YOU may not be confident enough to evaluate. What's left out is the erosion of what you paid for to affirm the original "history in your hands." If the already GRADED coin is not the "end" then it's of no value in the first place.
topstuf is what he is and so is TDN and so are you.
This response of yours is exactly what I mean (above.) You enjoy a touch of self-pity and indulging in a ton of introspection (as do I, but I think not as much as yourself.) In fact, I'll probably do some navel-gazing this evening. My biggest coins are five figures mostly -- when you include the decimal point. But truth be told, I think I own perhaps two 4-figure coins and a whole slew of stuff worth much less than 3 figures. And I am happy doing so -- probably extremely happy, to be accurate -- not to have to sweat what CAC does and does not do for my coins, instead being able to learn from these threads without having monetary skin in the game.
The only thing I sweat is "sweating."
And nothing that adds it to a hobby is a good thing.
So say I and I alone.
maybe.
Well I for one do appreciate getting TDN's views, which are candid and not just marketing-speak. Losing Pogues, Gardner, Newman certainly had to have an effect on high end coins. You don't quickly replace some of those pockets (and I am not even counting what Mr. Simpson is doing as I am not sure).
As another example, if Gerald Forsythe up and sells his Buffalos and Walkers and Mercuries, what effect will that have on those markets? Having such a kingpin in a popular series provides a lot of comfort for the markets of those coins right up until he sells everything.
One thing I would mention is it is interesting that in whatever coin TDN was looking at, he valued CAC over crossover. I think that is fair but the power of the registry is often underestimated. PCGS's registry program has been a huge boon to its brand and has really hurt a lot of NGC coins.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
I valued CAC over crossover because I fully believe that if I like it and JA likes it that eventually it will cross
Is that like saying She's ugly now but after we're married she might look okay?
Competition is good for buyers, no matter the market. If it truly does end up being a PCGS-CAC "monopoly of opinions", it's not good for the average or even the above average collector. It's a great money maker for dealers, crack-out artists, and PCGS -- but it's not good for the hobby for people to be so enamored by the (non-static) opinions of two completely subjective services.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
My sets: [280+ horse coins] :: [France Sowers] :: [Colorful world copper] :: [Beautiful world coins]
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Once upon a time, people collected coins and put them in a box or a pouch and looked at them once in a while for fun.
Then somebody poked some holes in boards and made a nice way to see more coins much easier and enjoy the activity on a pleasant evening over a cup of mead or something.
This went on for quite a long while until somebody came over to share the experience with the guy who had the neat board full of coins.
This stranger said, "Urk!...That coin not look like real coin."
And thus the collector began to wonder.
Hundreds of years passed with no progress from this primitive status.
Then a company came along...(business got invented).... and said, "Hey guys, WE will look at your coins and tell you if they are real or not. _ Unless we're not sure._"
What a relief from doubt was the emergence of this new thing.
Then, seeing the sanskrit on the wall, another company said, "Hey, let's go another step further and not only tell people if their coins are real, but also put them in a rock or something to keep anyone else from messing with them.
And so it came to pass that peace reigned throughout the land.
Collectors of coins relaxed and enjoyed their coins in the evenings when they weren't drinking or carousing at the riverbank.
and...THEN.....
Some guy sidled up to the contented collectors and said...... he said...... oh yes, he did say...,** "HOW CAN YOU BE SURE?"**
And peace departed the land and all was not good again.
So it came to pass that the coin collectors finally said, "HOLY SMOKES! WTF are we doing? Are we SAPS?"
And the auction companies rejoiced.
The .....end?
What Im seeing is also that the coinholders dont matter so much anymore regarding the price of the coin, in some cases not at all.
I just bought yesterday this coin
https://coins.ha.com/itm/seated-dimes/1884-s-10c-f-102-r3-ms67-pcgs/a/1252-3697.s
and it sold for the same 14.100 two years before as PCGS 66.
The same was the case with the 1792 half disme at heritage that sold for 497k USD as PCGS 66, its the same that sold for 520k USD as PCGS 65 one year before - and I never liked the coin myself. I bought the green holder PCGS 66 ex Hays that sold at Stacksbowers some years ago for 793k USD.
Another very good example are the two PCGS 66 1813 half eagles that sold at Pogue, one brought 130k the other one brought 230k, although the 230k one was graded 66+.
Nice pick-up on that dime. The exact same price realized as a PCGS not-CAC 67 as a PCGS/CAC 66 16 months ago. Interesting. Have you seen it in-hand yet? Do you feel it deserved the bump to 67?
Yes... coins are a business.... Whenever, wherever, there is profit to be made, someone - no, many someone's - will jump in to garner the wealth. And, when 'someone' figures out a way to get MORE wealth, that, too, will be instituted. This should surprise no one. It was a business even before TPG and FPG's.... So, unless you only collect from pocket change, people are forced into, at least, the buying portion of the business. Basic insecurity, will often lead some into the grading game.... However, most who take those further steps are looking for monetary gain.... not a bad thing, but definitely business more than hobby. Cheers, RickO
It's probably the case that not having Gene Gardner and others around to help the bidding, things are finding a softer level. Most higher level seated set owners would know the coin upgraded and factor that into their bidding. If this coin were still in the same 66 holder from 2 yrs ago, it probably would have sold for closer to $10K-$12K than the present $14K. When it comes to type coins, PCGS MS67 almost always trumps PCGS MS66 CAC by a good margin. So it probably did get "some" $ help from the 67 holder. It was likely CAC'd last time around as 66....not this time as a 67.
Market participants have caught on to grade bumps....and may not be willing to reward those players with significant profits any longer....unless it can sticker. Coin holders still do matter. Would this coin have realized the same $14K in an NGC M67 holder?
.....
Yes, the current issue of Coin World has a full page article on the comparative auction sales of the half disme to which you make reference.
Bump for a very thought-provoking discussion. I have plenty of raw coins (mostly early coppers) that I bought that way, coins in NGC or PCGS holders, coins that I removed from their slabs, and coins in slabs with CAC stickers on them. A few of them are in slabs with 'optimistic' grades, in my opinion. Have Forum members deliberately cracked out a coin, believed to be overgraded, and then resubmitted it in the hope that it comes back at a lower grade (to improve liquidity)?
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 not.
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
It's perception of quality that varies.
It's both.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Slightly different question along the same lines...does anyone have any experience with asking our host to downgrade a coin?
Roseanne Barrett I - CAC Morgan Dollar Basic Set, Circulation Strikes (Retired)
Roseanne Barrett - CAC Basic Seated Liberty Type Set, Circulation Strikes
Bump for a very thought-provoking discussion.
can I tell you the thought's that this thread provoked in me, a month short of three years later?? it is that the same members that talked like they knew what they were talking about three years ago still talk like that. they never learn, they never consider that other members know more than them. during the interim the members who really do have a knowledge base to post from have backed off or become silent altogether.
why is it so hard for certain members to just shut up and try to listen??
How about large cents?
So much grading chaos & confusion that you actually have to look at the coin.
My Saint Set