First of all I do not offer / pay above the TPG grade on the holder. If the seller wants more bc of some sticker then they will need send it in to TPG get that grade (good luck lol) if they think it its undergraded.
There are always buyers w insane bids most likely over paying bc of bid war, color of tarnish, greed it’s somehow under graded, need it for set, etc. Of course the sellers are delighted.
I had 2 mercury dimes that were graded ms 65. Both gold cac'ed and brought 5 times what they should. They were a 1942 and 1944 S and in PCGS "rattlers".
Not very often, to answer the question.
@keets said:
Actually, the thread title would have been as follows, but the "Discussion Title" bar won't allow it, too long:
How often do you think PCGS under-grades a coin by 3-points?? --- or --- Why do collectors seem to place so much value on the Gold CAC sticker??
I've been "watching" a coin at an auction which is in a PCGS holder with a Gold CAC sticker. At the holder grade the coin is valued around $75. Following the cert verification, the coin has three recorded sales:
2007 DLRC --- $86.
2010 DLRC --- $173.
March 2021 Stack's with the CAC --- $1,320.
It seems clear, to me at least, that maybe the venue influenced the price because of more exposure, but the CAC sticker also causes the price to go up. To be fair, the coin is attractive but is available in the grades which would cause it to be valued at the Stack's March sales price. So I guess my next question would be: Why would collectors be willing to pay for a "maybe 3-point upgrade" vs. buying an already holdered coin in the grade they think this coin is?? The twist is also that I really doubt anyone will ever send it for regrade/reconsideration or crack it out and risk losing the Gold CAC sticker.
If you're counting, that makes three questions!! Help me understand this phenomenon.
Al H.
No idea, Cacs turned the whole tpg thing into beanie babie r us phenomena. Totally ruining coin collecting as we know it. I cannot wait for the day when the whole CACS bubble busts. Scam of the millennia, it will be great to watch.
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Wooooha! Did someone just say it's officially "TACO™" Tuesday????
I don't think I've ever seen a coin graded by PCGS that I thought was 3 points off. A point yes but the difference that cover 3 points would be a total screw up.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
Not even one time. Sometimes I don’t completely agree with some grades assigned but none have ever been that far off. I’d like to see a good example of one that has. In my book PCGS is the best in the business.
The bitterness of "Poor Quality" is remembered long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.
I know of a proof seated half that was in a pcgs pr65 ogh that got a gold sticker. It was cracked and then was graded pr66. it was sent to cac again and got another gold sticker. cracked a second time and came back from pcgs pr67. sent to pcgs and got pr67 and then a green sticker at cac
@joebb21 said:
I know of a proof seated half that was in a pcgs pr65 ogh that got a gold sticker. It was cracked and then was graded pr66. it was sent to cac again and got another gold sticker. cracked a second time and came back from pcgs pr67. sent to pcgs and got pr67 and then a green sticker at cac
Does that mean grading "standards" have changed?
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
FWIW I like this kind of toning on a Walker although it is not for everyone. There is a pretty significant spittle mark near the I in LIBERTY which may have contributed to the 64 grade.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
Not to steer away from the subject OP coin, but have the following upgrade to relate that was a full 5 points.
About 10 years ago I had purchased a fairly rare Brit coin (I know it's not American - but you can't argue with it's quality), and this was from auction with the assist of a well-known dealer on commission. I had seen the pictures and it looked to be a superior coin, and he confirmed it as such: well struck in a series that many times is not, excellent booming cartwheel luster and only a scattering of bag marks that in my experience were commiserate with a 63 or 64. I sent it into a major TPG (OK, you probably guessed which), and was rather shocked to have it come back AU58 when it clearly was not. I took it back to the TPG at a Baltimore show and expressed my thoughts and concerns & then wrote them down as well and gave the provenance.
It then cam back about two months later in a "63" which was the minimum. The reason that this is important is that an AU58 would likely if nice to be valued at 4-5k USD and a 63 at possibly triple that. It compares quite well to some of the graded 64s, and that would not be solely my opinion. I will have to dig the coin out of the SDB for pictures though and it is not the 63 that is pictured in pop reports though.
The coin? a 1905 Halfcrown.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
@keets first, welcome back from your recent hiatus.
To answer one of your questions, if I was willing to pay 67 money for a particular coin, I would NOT buy a coin in a 64 slab with a Gold CAC sticker - instead I’d buy a coin in a 67 PCGS holder that’s problem free with nice eye appeal, with a GREEN CAC sticker!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Steve, finally the voice of reason is heard!! I like the way you think.
and to anyone who has wondered, I'm certainly not anti-CAC, I simply enjoy understanding why collectors value the way they do. there have been some good, thought provoking explanations thus far.
@keets said:
Steve, finally the voice of reason is heard!! I like the way you think.
and to anyone who has wondered, I'm certainly not anti-CAC, I simply enjoy understanding why collectors value the way they do. there have been some good, thought provoking explanations thus far.
Steve was speaking sensibly and practically, from the point of view of most collectors. However, the top bidders for the coin might have been dealers, who have very different mindsets.
And then there are some collectors who buy such coins because, for whatever reason, they really want them. And they don’t have an issue with paying the price required to obtain them.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@keets said:
Steve, finally the voice of reason is heard!! I like the way you think.
and to anyone who has wondered, I'm certainly not anti-CAC, I simply enjoy understanding why collectors value the way they do. there have been some good, thought provoking explanations thus far.
You can't ignore the color factor here. These days, a 66 with color can bring more than a 67.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I bought the 1825 below off eBay several years ago in this 45 holder and when I got it in hand I knew it was definitely undergraded due to its incredible luster so I sent it in for regrade and it now resides in a PCGS 55 holder…. a 3 grade upgrade!
And the 1823 below was sold raw many years ago in a Stacks auction where it was described as a 64. I bought it in a PCGS 58 green CAC holder and subsequently sent it to JA for review because I believed it was definitely MS. He agreed with me and changed the green sticker to gold. The coin is completely Prooflike and has incredible surfaces! I won’t be sending this one in for regrade but it’s definitely NOT a 61 or a 62 in my opinion.
I think collectors are realizing that value and worth do not simply come from "grade".
Perhaps in the not too distant future dealers will make have the same epiphany.
@braddick said:
I think collectors are realizing that value and worth do not simply come from "grade".
Perhaps in the not too distant future dealers will make have the same epiphany.
Dealers already know that. But if a dealer puts a premium price on what they consider a premium coin, they are accused of ignorance and profiteering. See the recent thread asking what to do with the "overpriced" ebay coin.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@braddick said:
I think collectors are realizing that value and worth do not simply come from "grade".
Perhaps in the not too distant future dealers will make have the same epiphany.
Dealers already know that. But if a dealer puts a premium price on what they consider a premium coin, they are accused of ignorance and profiteering. See the recent thread asking what to do with the "overpriced" ebay coin.
Agreed. The profiteering part is certainly true in a lot of cases. But that doesn’t negate the fact that many dealers understand that value can be about much more than the assigned grade.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@winesteven said:
if I was willing to pay 67 money for a particular coin, I would NOT buy a coin in a 64 slab with a Gold CAC sticker - instead I’d buy a coin in a 67 PCGS holder that’s problem free with nice eye appeal, with a GREEN CAC sticker!
My choice would be the slab holding the coin I liked best over the one with the sticker/label I liked best.
@winesteven said:
if I was willing to pay 67 money for a particular coin, I would NOT buy a coin in a 64 slab with a Gold CAC sticker - instead I’d buy a coin in a 67 PCGS holder that’s problem free with nice eye appeal, with a GREEN CAC sticker!
My choice would be the slab holding the coin I liked best over the one with the sticker/label I liked best.
But that's just me.
I might choose to buy a 66 and put the rest of the money in an index fund.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@braddick said:
I think collectors are realizing that value and worth do not simply come from "grade".
Perhaps in the not too distant future dealers will make have the same epiphany.
Dealers already know that. But if a dealer puts a premium price on what they consider a premium coin, they are accused of ignorance and profiteering. See the recent thread asking what to do with the "overpriced" ebay coin.
Agreed. The profiteering part is certainly true in a lot of cases. But that doesn’t negate the fact that many dealers understand that value can be about much more than the assigned grade.
Agreed. I'm not sure why collectors think that they understand value better than dealers. A dealer's livelihood depends on their understanding of the market. That understanding has to include coins that need to be discounted to move and those that can command a premium.
That sometimes influences your choice of sales venue. If I have a routine 65 Morgan, I would never send it to auction because I'm giving up 20+% of the commodity sales price on a coin that has a 10% bid/ask spread. But if I have a stellar 65 Morgan (CAC or not), then I might send it to auction in hopes that others recognize its premium.
Auctions tend to be efficient determiners of value. They are not perfect, of course. But if a coin sells for a premium at auction and you don't agree with the price, the question you should ask yourself is "what am I missing?" not "what is wrong with people?"
The market is smarter than every individual in it...well, except for maybe JA.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
"Auctions tend to be efficient determiners of value. "
No! An auction represents a time point. If one or two determined bidders fail to show up, the result can be very different. There are plenty of cases where coins brought surprising prices at auction, only to be sold at losses within a few years.
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
@Sonorandesertrat said:
"Auctions tend to be efficient determiners of value. "
No! An auction represents a time point. If one or two determined bidders fail to show up, the result can be very different. There are plenty of cases where coins brought surprising prices at auction, only to be sold at losses within a few years.
As I said, they are not perfect. They are, however, better than fixed price offerings unless the buyer and seller have identical knowledge, experience, and understanding of the market.
The fact that an occasional item slips through an auction does not negate the overall efficiency of the auction. Finding a few exceptions and turning them into the rule is not scientific. I know someone who died from eating ham. You would, therefore, conclude that ham should not be eaten by humans because it is poisonous?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@Sonorandesertrat said:
"Auctions tend to be efficient determiners of value. "
No! An auction represents a time point. If one or two determined bidders fail to show up, the result can be very different. There are plenty of cases where coins brought surprising prices at auction, only to be sold at losses within a few years.
In the context of determining values based on what's selling on eBay, my preference is for using fixed price sales over auctions for this very reason. I quite often find that auction results include extremes (both high and low) that fixed price sales don't. Why that's so, I can't say for sure but I'm pretty confident that the presence (or absence) of determined bidders has a lot to do with it.
@Sonorandesertrat said:
"Auctions tend to be efficient determiners of value. "
No! An auction represents a time point. If one or two determined bidders fail to show up, the result can be very different. There are plenty of cases where coins brought surprising prices at auction, only to be sold at losses within a few years.
In the context of determining values based on what's selling on eBay, my preference is for using fixed price sales over auctions for this very reason. I quite often find that auction results include extremes (both high and low) that fixed price sales don't. Why that's so, I can't say for sure but I'm pretty confident that the presence (or absence) of determined bidders has a lot to do with it.
eBay isn't the type of auction to which I'm referring. The sheer number of items on eBay makes it easy for something to be missed. But if the upcoming ANA auctions are not efficient determiners of value, then there is no such thing as an efficient determiner of value.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@jmlanzaf said:
eBay isn't the type of auction to which I'm referring.
I suspected it might not be, which is why I made a point of noting that I was talking about eBay, not Stacks, Heritage or whatever.
I've given up on 99 cent no reserve eBay auctions for that reason. With a million items to sort through, easy to miss something. Even if you find it, the dumb snipers forget to snipe sometimes.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@Sonorandesertrat said:
"Auctions tend to be efficient determiners of value. "
No! An auction represents a time point. If one or two determined bidders fail to show up, the result can be very different. There are plenty of cases where coins brought surprising prices at auction, only to be sold at losses within a few years.
No! to your “No!”. 😉 He said “tend to be efficient determiners of value” not “are prefect determiners of value”. Any transaction - whether auction, trade or private sale - represents a time point and prices could be very different later, if not immediately afterwards.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@jmlanzaf said:
Even if you find it, the dumb snipers forget to snipe sometimes.
People snipe because they don't want to have anyone bidding against them. As a seller, what's the point of holding an auction for "buyers" like that? Might as well just set the price yourself. So that's what I do- look to see what people are willing to pay for comparable items, and set my price.
@jmlanzaf said:
Even if you find it, the dumb snipers forget to snipe sometimes.
People snipe because they don't want to have anyone bidding against them. As a seller, what's the point of holding an auction for "buyers" like that? Might as well just set the price yourself. So that's what I do- look to see what people are willing to pay for comparable items, and set my price.
At a "true auction", you can't snipe because there is no clock. We bid until we are down to one bidder.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
"...there is no such thing as an efficient determiner of value."
Bingo. In the numismatic world, this is one of the key problems, in my opinion. Roadrunner has repeatedly stated that the 'true' (i.e., accurate) grade of a coin can easily require multiple grade submissions to sort out (and grade is a proxy for value), and I agree. Apparent values to buyers can easily be manipulated---look at what is going on with 1921 Peace dollars, and ask what the likely situation vis-à-vis these will be in two years. Marketing schemes (starting with coin boards and albums, including on-line registry sets) play a central role in manipulating coin values in the eyes of many collectors. The fundamental problem is that most collector coins are not rare, so getting buyers to pay up for these requires clever marketing. Pull common coins out of the marketplace, and most coin dealers will be looking for work.
Regarding a buyer and a seller with matched knowledge, there could easily be agreement on a coin transaction, even if the item is raw (I have purchased raw MS large cents many times). A single sale is just one data point in the history of a coin. Now replace the buyer with another buyer. Will the 'value' of the coin be the same?
Member: EAC, NBS, C4, CWTS, ANA
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
@Sonorandesertrat said:
Marketing schemes (starting with coin boards and albums, including on-line registry sets) play a central role in manipulating coin values in the eyes of many collectors.
What percentage of date/mint collectors would buy a 3 legged buffalo or '55 DD Lincoln for their set if there wasn't a hole for it?
Comments
I don’t.
First of all I do not offer / pay above the TPG grade on the holder. If the seller wants more bc of some sticker then they will need send it in to TPG get that grade (good luck lol) if they think it its undergraded.
There are always buyers w insane bids most likely over paying bc of bid war, color of tarnish, greed it’s somehow under graded, need it for set, etc. Of course the sellers are delighted.
I had 2 mercury dimes that were graded ms 65. Both gold cac'ed and brought 5 times what they should. They were a 1942 and 1944 S and in PCGS "rattlers".
Not very often, to answer the question.
No idea, Cacs turned the whole tpg thing into beanie babie r us phenomena. Totally ruining coin collecting as we know it. I cannot wait for the day when the whole CACS bubble busts. Scam of the millennia, it will be great to watch.
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Wooooha! Did someone just say it's officially "TACO™" Tuesday????
I don't think I've ever seen a coin graded by PCGS that I thought was 3 points off. A point yes but the difference that cover 3 points would be a total screw up.
CAC offers an opinion on a coin's grade, just as PCGS/NGC/ANACS do. Why is that a scam?
Not even one time. Sometimes I don’t completely agree with some grades assigned but none have ever been that far off. I’d like to see a good example of one that has. In my book PCGS is the best in the business.
I know of a proof seated half that was in a pcgs pr65 ogh that got a gold sticker. It was cracked and then was graded pr66. it was sent to cac again and got another gold sticker. cracked a second time and came back from pcgs pr67. sent to pcgs and got pr67 and then a green sticker at cac
Please see the 500 closed CAC threads. Lol.
It is so similar to how old timers felt about the TPGs in the 1990s.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I wasn't asking IF people think it's a scam, I want to know WHY it's a scam.
Because they think it is artificially inflating the price of coins.
[Personally, I think it's just another case of people being mad that they can't buy under-priced coins. ]
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Does that mean grading "standards" have changed?
Hmmmm... I'll take Door #2, Monty.
FWIW I like this kind of toning on a Walker although it is not for everyone. There is a pretty significant spittle mark near the I in LIBERTY which may have contributed to the 64 grade.
"Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.
I have 2 Walker's in MS65 and for the money I cannot imagine paying what the OP's mentioned coin brought, with or without CAC. Amazing.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Not to steer away from the subject OP coin, but have the following upgrade to relate that was a full 5 points.
About 10 years ago I had purchased a fairly rare Brit coin (I know it's not American - but you can't argue with it's quality), and this was from auction with the assist of a well-known dealer on commission. I had seen the pictures and it looked to be a superior coin, and he confirmed it as such: well struck in a series that many times is not, excellent booming cartwheel luster and only a scattering of bag marks that in my experience were commiserate with a 63 or 64. I sent it into a major TPG (OK, you probably guessed which), and was rather shocked to have it come back AU58 when it clearly was not. I took it back to the TPG at a Baltimore show and expressed my thoughts and concerns & then wrote them down as well and gave the provenance.
It then cam back about two months later in a "63" which was the minimum. The reason that this is important is that an AU58 would likely if nice to be valued at 4-5k USD and a 63 at possibly triple that. It compares quite well to some of the graded 64s, and that would not be solely my opinion. I will have to dig the coin out of the SDB for pictures though and it is not the 63 that is pictured in pop reports though.
The coin? a 1905 Halfcrown.
Well, just Love coins, period.
@keets first, welcome back from your recent hiatus.
To answer one of your questions, if I was willing to pay 67 money for a particular coin, I would NOT buy a coin in a 64 slab with a Gold CAC sticker - instead I’d buy a coin in a 67 PCGS holder that’s problem free with nice eye appeal, with a GREEN CAC sticker!
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Steve, finally the voice of reason is heard!! I like the way you think.
and to anyone who has wondered, I'm certainly not anti-CAC, I simply enjoy understanding why collectors value the way they do. there have been some good, thought provoking explanations thus far.
Steve was speaking sensibly and practically, from the point of view of most collectors. However, the top bidders for the coin might have been dealers, who have very different mindsets.
And then there are some collectors who buy such coins because, for whatever reason, they really want them. And they don’t have an issue with paying the price required to obtain them.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
You can't ignore the color factor here. These days, a 66 with color can bring more than a 67.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I don’t think it happens very often for sure.
I bought the 1825 below off eBay several years ago in this 45 holder and when I got it in hand I knew it was definitely undergraded due to its incredible luster so I sent it in for regrade and it now resides in a PCGS 55 holder…. a 3 grade upgrade!
And the 1823 below was sold raw many years ago in a Stacks auction where it was described as a 64. I bought it in a PCGS 58 green CAC holder and subsequently sent it to JA for review because I believed it was definitely MS. He agreed with me and changed the green sticker to gold. The coin is completely Prooflike and has incredible surfaces! I won’t be sending this one in for regrade but it’s definitely NOT a 61 or a 62 in my opinion.
Dave
I think collectors are realizing that value and worth do not simply come from "grade".
Perhaps in the not too distant future dealers will make have the same epiphany.
peacockcoins
Dealers already know that. But if a dealer puts a premium price on what they consider a premium coin, they are accused of ignorance and profiteering. See the recent thread asking what to do with the "overpriced" ebay coin.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Agreed. The profiteering part is certainly true in a lot of cases. But that doesn’t negate the fact that many dealers understand that value can be about much more than the assigned grade.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
My choice would be the slab holding the coin I liked best over the one with the sticker/label I liked best.
But that's just me.
I had 3 nice wlh go from au58 to 64 back in the day. That’s 5 grades right there
I might choose to buy a 66 and put the rest of the money in an index fund.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Agreed. I'm not sure why collectors think that they understand value better than dealers. A dealer's livelihood depends on their understanding of the market. That understanding has to include coins that need to be discounted to move and those that can command a premium.
That sometimes influences your choice of sales venue. If I have a routine 65 Morgan, I would never send it to auction because I'm giving up 20+% of the commodity sales price on a coin that has a 10% bid/ask spread. But if I have a stellar 65 Morgan (CAC or not), then I might send it to auction in hopes that others recognize its premium.
Auctions tend to be efficient determiners of value. They are not perfect, of course. But if a coin sells for a premium at auction and you don't agree with the price, the question you should ask yourself is "what am I missing?" not "what is wrong with people?"
The market is smarter than every individual in it...well, except for maybe JA.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
That wasn't one of the options available, you know.
"Auctions tend to be efficient determiners of value. "
No! An auction represents a time point. If one or two determined bidders fail to show up, the result can be very different. There are plenty of cases where coins brought surprising prices at auction, only to be sold at losses within a few years.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
As I said, they are not perfect. They are, however, better than fixed price offerings unless the buyer and seller have identical knowledge, experience, and understanding of the market.
The fact that an occasional item slips through an auction does not negate the overall efficiency of the auction. Finding a few exceptions and turning them into the rule is not scientific. I know someone who died from eating ham. You would, therefore, conclude that ham should not be eaten by humans because it is poisonous?
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
In the context of determining values based on what's selling on eBay, my preference is for using fixed price sales over auctions for this very reason. I quite often find that auction results include extremes (both high and low) that fixed price sales don't. Why that's so, I can't say for sure but I'm pretty confident that the presence (or absence) of determined bidders has a lot to do with it.
eBay isn't the type of auction to which I'm referring. The sheer number of items on eBay makes it easy for something to be missed. But if the upcoming ANA auctions are not efficient determiners of value, then there is no such thing as an efficient determiner of value.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
I suspected it might not be, which is why I made a point of noting that I was talking about eBay, not Stacks, Heritage or whatever.
I've given up on 99 cent no reserve eBay auctions for that reason. With a million items to sort through, easy to miss something. Even if you find it, the dumb snipers forget to snipe sometimes.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
No! to your “No!”. 😉 He said “tend to be efficient determiners of value” not “are prefect determiners of value”. Any transaction - whether auction, trade or private sale - represents a time point and prices could be very different later, if not immediately afterwards.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
People snipe because they don't want to have anyone bidding against them. As a seller, what's the point of holding an auction for "buyers" like that? Might as well just set the price yourself. So that's what I do- look to see what people are willing to pay for comparable items, and set my price.
At a "true auction", you can't snipe because there is no clock. We bid until we are down to one bidder.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
"...there is no such thing as an efficient determiner of value."
Bingo. In the numismatic world, this is one of the key problems, in my opinion. Roadrunner has repeatedly stated that the 'true' (i.e., accurate) grade of a coin can easily require multiple grade submissions to sort out (and grade is a proxy for value), and I agree. Apparent values to buyers can easily be manipulated---look at what is going on with 1921 Peace dollars, and ask what the likely situation vis-à-vis these will be in two years. Marketing schemes (starting with coin boards and albums, including on-line registry sets) play a central role in manipulating coin values in the eyes of many collectors. The fundamental problem is that most collector coins are not rare, so getting buyers to pay up for these requires clever marketing. Pull common coins out of the marketplace, and most coin dealers will be looking for work.
Regarding a buyer and a seller with matched knowledge, there could easily be agreement on a coin transaction, even if the item is raw (I have purchased raw MS large cents many times). A single sale is just one data point in the history of a coin. Now replace the buyer with another buyer. Will the 'value' of the coin be the same?
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
What percentage of date/mint collectors would buy a 3 legged buffalo or '55 DD Lincoln for their set if there wasn't a hole for it?