Sorry but I can already see that this will be a little long .
I see a couple comments on not including GC in the pcgs auction and/or price results. This is also true for Greysheet. However, this comment I believe should be directed towards GC as they do Not release their auction records in bulk to anyone. Therefore, as I understand it, to use the data would require going to GC website and pulling individual results and not being able to necessarily link to the auction result information. Heritage and Stacks and others do allow their results to be 'bulk' used and therefore are seen in the auction records of other sites like pcgs and greysheet/CDN.
@winesteven Now look what you did. j/k
Many of the CDN values now (emphasis on now) do not agree with the numbers you quoted above. Why? Well an example is below. These are the wholesale CAC.
$2000 change to $2200 on 11/25/25 and then change on 11/28/25 (today for this post) to $5500. with a CAC CPG $6250.
It appears many others other than the ones you mentioned were also updated.
@winesteven Yes, your post on the greysheet or CDN versus CPG is correct. This is for both the CAC and non-CAC.
Greysheet defines their CPG to be a proprietary formula (or factor) based off of their greysheet (wholesale) value to generate a CPG (retail) number. Typically this value ranges from around 1.35 times the greysheet (wholesale) for lower value coins to about 1.20 times the greysheet (wholesale) value for higher priced coins. As CDN states when the greysheet (wholesale) value is changed the CPG (retail) value will change with it. This is done independently for CAC and then non-CAC coins.
Next perhaps another question to ask is why should different price guides agree? One answer might be when they represent the same thing. But then how the prices are determined could also generate differences.
Looking at what the pcgs and greysheet represent:
PCGS states that their price guide represents:
"The prices listed in the PCGS Price Guide are average dealer asking prices for PCGS-graded coins."
From: https://www.pcgs.com/prices
This does Not distinguish between pcgs non-cac and pcgs cac. In some cases this difference could be small at 10% or less. But in other cases it could be much larger at 50% or 100% (twice as much) or maybe even more on select cases. Also the average dealer asking prices in some cases could be somewhat iffy.
CDN - greysheet does distinguish between non-cac and cac approved coins where such coins are available. However, CDN does not distinguish between NGC and PCGS for cac approved or not cac approved. Similar to the pcgs non-cac versus pcgs cac, the difference between an NGC and PCGS or NGC cac and PCGS cac can be small at 10% or less. But again sometimes the difference can be much larger (50% or 100% twice as much) and this for similar coins not some special toned coin or similar.
I will also note that, as I recall, John F has stated somewhere in a video as I recall, that CDN will typically error on the side of a lower price guide value when data is limited or there is a divergence of the data.
So from this, these two price guides might not be representing the same thing.
@EastonCollection
You mentioned/asked why did pcgs lower the price on the 10c 1827 MS66.
Perhaps another question to ask is why did CDN also lower the price? Here is the information on that and these are CAC greysheet (wholesale).
Oct 2019 $24,000.
Oct 2020 $20,000.
June 25, 2025 $27,500.
Nov 25, 2025 $16250. (with CPG $19500) ********* price reduced
Nov 28, 2025 $17,380. with CPG $21,000.
Like winesteven's above the value was updated today (as of this post) to a slightly higher value compared to the OP.
So why did both price guides reduce the value?
I don't know but could a bid have been pulled or something similar?
The most recent auction record I see is for a non-cac NGC from SB 8/13/24 at $12,000. which CDN could use for their non-cac valuation. Could this impact the perceived CDN cac approved value? I don't know.
@TrickleCharge
Yes, the pcgs auction prices realized has not done well in recent years. It is more than just the sorting. Since about 2023 pcgs auction prices realized has been generally slow to post auction results and they are also not posting as many auction results as in years past. Currently the last Heritage auction results are from July 2025 and Stacks Sept 2025 (and if one tracks eBay those are Aug 2025). Don't know if anything has changed for access to Goldbergs, Scottsman and DLRC but those have not been included since 2023. Additionally the number of auctions included from particularly Heritage but also Stacks has gone down. It is now mainly the more significant auctions whereas previously the included some of the weekly auctions or specialty auctions.
Price guides are pretty close to accurate on the highest volume sales coins; for example Morgan and Peace dollars, Moderns where you could back up a semi trailer to a major show and fill it.
@lilolme said:
Sorry but I can already see that this will be a little long .
I see a couple comments on not including GC in the pcgs auction and/or price results. This is also true for Greysheet. However, this comment I believe should be directed towards GC as they do Not release their auction records in bulk to anyone. Therefore, as I understand it, to use the data would require going to GC website and pulling individual results and not being able to necessarily link to the auction result information. Heritage and Stacks and others do allow their results to be 'bulk' used and therefore are seen in the auction records of other sites like pcgs and greysheet/CDN.
@winesteven Now look what you did. j/k
Many of the CDN values now (emphasis on now) do not agree with the numbers you quoted above. Why? Well an example is below. These are the wholesale CAC.
$2000 change to $2200 on 11/25/25 and then change on 11/28/25 (today for this post) to $5500. with a CAC CPG $6250.
It appears many others other than the ones you mentioned were also updated.
@winesteven Yes, your post on the greysheet or CDN versus CPG is correct. This is for both the CAC and non-CAC.
Greysheet defines their CPG to be a proprietary formula (or factor) based off of their greysheet (wholesale) value to generate a CPG (retail) number. Typically this value ranges from around 1.35 times the greysheet (wholesale) for lower value coins to about 1.20 times the greysheet (wholesale) value for higher priced coins. As CDN states when the greysheet (wholesale) value is changed the CPG (retail) value will change with it. This is done independently for CAC and then non-CAC coins.
Next perhaps another question to ask is why should different price guides agree? One answer might be when they represent the same thing. But then how the prices are determined could also generate differences.
Looking at what the pcgs and greysheet represent:
PCGS states that their price guide represents:
"The prices listed in the PCGS Price Guide are average dealer asking prices for PCGS-graded coins."
From: https://www.pcgs.com/prices
This does Not distinguish between pcgs non-cac and pcgs cac. In some cases this difference could be small at 10% or less. But in other cases it could be much larger at 50% or 100% (twice as much) or maybe even more on select cases. Also the average dealer asking prices in some cases could be somewhat iffy.
CDN - greysheet does distinguish between non-cac and cac approved coins where such coins are available. However, CDN does not distinguish between NGC and PCGS for cac approved or not cac approved. Similar to the pcgs non-cac versus pcgs cac, the difference between an NGC and PCGS or NGC cac and PCGS cac can be small at 10% or less. But again sometimes the difference can be much larger (50% or 100% twice as much) and this for similar coins not some special toned coin or similar.
I will also note that, as I recall, John F has stated somewhere in a video as I recall, that CDN will typically error on the side of a lower price guide value when data is limited or there is a divergence of the data.
So from this, these two price guides might not be representing the same thing.
@EastonCollection
You mentioned/asked why did pcgs lower the price on the 10c 1827 MS66.
Perhaps another question to ask is why did CDN also lower the price? Here is the information on that and these are CAC greysheet (wholesale).
Oct 2019 $24,000.
Oct 2020 $20,000.
June 25, 2025 $27,500.
Nov 25, 2025 $16250. (with CPG $19500) ********* price reduced
Nov 28, 2025 $17,380. with CPG $21,000.
Like winesteven's above the value was updated today (as of this post) to a slightly higher value compared to the OP.
So why did both price guides reduce the value?
I don't know but could a bid have been pulled or something similar?
The most recent auction record I see is for a non-cac NGC from SB 8/13/24 at $12,000. which CDN could use for their non-cac valuation. Could this impact the perceived CDN cac approved value? I don't know.
@TrickleCharge
Yes, the pcgs auction prices realized has not done well in recent years. It is more than just the sorting. Since about 2023 pcgs auction prices realized has been generally slow to post auction results and they are also not posting as many auction results as in years past. Currently the last Heritage auction results are from July 2025 and Stacks Sept 2025 (and if one tracks eBay those are Aug 2025). Don't know if anything has changed for access to Goldbergs, Scottsman and DLRC but those have not been included since 2023. Additionally the number of auctions included from particularly Heritage but also Stacks has gone down. It is now mainly the more significant auctions whereas previously the included some of the weekly auctions or specialty auctions.
Please don’t apologize for your thorough and informative post.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It's quite a paradox, guides are used every day but how can they be "accurate" in a business model where prices change everyday based on supply and demand and many other factors.. I think one must get as much information availalbe before buying or selling and join the game!
Now if "insiders" (strategy moves or non movements if the case may be) are changing the rules, that's a different game, Some will play some won't..
Guides do work on lower end stuff, how do I know that a 1916 D merc. dime in a PCGS good 04 holder is worth a grand and the same coin in a PCGS AG03 holder is worth $750
@winesteven Now look what you did. j/k
Many of the CDN values now (emphasis on now) do not agree with the numbers you quoted above. Why? Well an example is below. These are the wholesale CAC.
$2000 change to $2200 on 11/25/25 and then change on 11/28/25 (today for this post) to $5500. with a CAC CPG $6250.
It appears many others other than the ones you mentioned were also updated.
Thanks for your analysis. Yes, figures do change regularly. The figures i showed for the Proof Barber Dimes were taken just very early this morning from the CAC price Report. Are you instead referring to my example in a lower post showing actual figures for a MS64 coin I'm watching that is not a Proof Barber Dime? Perhaps the actual CAC Price Report (based on Greysheet figures) doesn't incorporate those changes as often as the raw numbers are updated? Am I misinterpreting what you stated? If not, then the problem described by the OP stands, since the CAC Price Report is online, and therefore should be updated at the same time and frequency as the raw Greysheet data that it's based on? If not, that's not good, as the OP and I indicate.
Please clarify.
Thanks.
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
GC is not figured in because GC doesn't want to be figured in. They own their own data and aren't interested in sharing it. Complain to Ian
I should have stated my comment better. I'm aware that GC chooses not to provide their data. And I'm not really complaining. Just makes it a little more time consuming in researching data to come up with my own idea on a particular coins worth.
I really appreciated reading through this thread @EastonCollection and glad you started it. Still trying to catch up with some of the one's I missed while I was off and away in NZ.
One of my pet peeves with the PCGS price guide (in particular) SHOULD be an easy fix, but it never seems to happen. It involves Capped Bust Halves that have been attributed on the holder. There are multiple cases where the "Base Price" exceeds the "Attributed Pricing".
As an example (see below), the "Base Price" shows the 1818 as $550. (EF40) / $2000. (AU55) / $4000. (MS60) coin, but in almost every case, if the coin is in an attributed holder (showing the Overton #), the coin will show up priced for less (typically $400/1250/3000).
Which leads to the question of what exactly is the point? just more confusion on pricing. Anyone who enters the cert # on one of the attributed coins will be shown prices that are less than the supposed "Most Common", or "Base Price" coin without attribution.
Believe me, as of right now, 1818 is NOT the only year suffering from this transgression.
From a very basic coding standpoint, IF basegradeprice > attrgradeprice, then set attrgradeprice = basegradeprice
That at least gives all EF40 graded CBH's of that year a minimum of the price shown for the unattributed examples.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
I haven’t read through all the comments, but here’s a thought.
We’re not really dealing with an aspect of coin collecting, we’re dealing with statistics deviation. Anytime something shows up on the market with regularity you’re going to have more reliable data than you will if it shows up infrequently. Any coin that lands solidly within the standard distribution will be (usually) easier to quantify because you have more data points. Any coin that falls in the top or bottom of the measured data will have fewer data points, therefore less reliability.
Most very high end coin collectors understand this principle either intuitively or intellectually.
Even if a grading company does is very very best and spends an inordinate amount of time and effort on their price guide is going to miss on the infrequent things, it would normally happen in any statistical measurement, regardless of what it is.
What you’re saying is that a coin that shows up on the market every ten ten years or so doesn’t have a reliable data set. You’re right, it doesn’t. It can’t reliably have one. Price guides in that range must, by definition, just be an idea of what might be expected if one did come to the market, not a measurement of what the market will actually support.
@tradedollarnut said:
Are they wrong? I paid $57k to buy this coin in an NGC 68* holder
I just downgrade crossed it to PCGS 67+ Cameo. Price guide $57,500
But it does beg the question of which came first - the chicken or the egg? Did it realize $57,600 because everyone thought it was a 67+Cam and that was what the Pcgs price guide said? Or is it that’s the current true market value for said coin and the price guide just happened to be correct this time. Hmmm.
How often do you read, right here on this message board, that someone is buried in a coin because the amount of his winning bid was $$$ more than what's in the price guide? Or a seller is mocked because the price marked on a coin he's selling is $$$ more than the price guide?
@winesteven Now look what you did. j/k
Many of the CDN values now (emphasis on now) do not agree with the numbers you quoted above. Why? Well an example is below. These are the wholesale CAC.
$2000 change to $2200 on 11/25/25 and then change on 11/28/25 (today for this post) to $5500. with a CAC CPG $6250.
It appears many others other than the ones you mentioned were also updated.
Thanks for your analysis. Yes, figures do change regularly. The figures i showed for the Proof Barber Dimes were taken just very early this morning from the CAC price Report. Are you instead referring to my example in a lower post showing actual figures for a MS64 coin I'm watching that is not a Proof Barber Dime? Perhaps the actual CAC Price Report (based on Greysheet figures) doesn't incorporate those changes as often as the raw numbers are updated? Am I misinterpreting what you stated? If not, then the problem described by the OP stands, since the CAC Price Report is online, and therefore should be updated at the same time and frequency as the raw Greysheet data that it's based on? If not, that's not good, as the OP and I indicate.
Please clarify.
Thanks.
Steve
I see I left out a key part of the information. I was referring to the 1901 10c PR67 CAM CAC.
It was at $2000. (wholesale).
It was changed to S2200. (wholesale) on 11/25/25 (although their price history chart indicates this was back in 2021)
Note: this was probably the $2750. (retail) that you quoted in your post from the CAC website (CDN factor would have been 2750/2200 = 1.25 for CDN wholesale to retail)
On the CDN webpage and app I now (11/28/2025) see a greysheet of $5000. (wholesale) or $6250. (retail).
So I was joking (although I kind of suspect that it might be actually why) that you caused this price jump with your reporting of what you paid in the post. That was the "Now look at what you did. j/k "
Note: It does still show $2750. on the CAC website but that is not what the CDN webpage is showing so there is apparently some delay. Should be coming soon to a theater near to you.
@tradedollarnut said:
Are they wrong? I paid $57k to buy this coin in an NGC 68* holder
But it does beg the question of which came first - the chicken or the egg? Did it realize $57,600 because everyone thought it was a 67+Cam and that was what the Pcgs price guide said? Or is it that’s the current true market value for said coin and the price guide just happened to be correct this time. Hmmm.
The current NGC price guide places the value of a PR67 at $25,000 and a PR68 at $60,000. If those were the values at the time of the auction and you were aware of both the PCGS and NGC values, that $120,000 PR68 valuation at PCGS must have made your bid a very tempting conservative gamble. The downside is that it could have come back as a PCGS PF67 @ $35,000!
@tradedollarnut said:
Are they wrong? I paid $57k to buy this coin in an NGC 68* holder
But it does beg the question of which came first - the chicken or the egg? Did it realize $57,600 because everyone thought it was a 67+Cam and that was what the Pcgs price guide said? Or is it that’s the current true market value for said coin and the price guide just happened to be correct this time. Hmmm.
The current NGC price guide places the value of a PR67 at $25,000 and a PR68 at $60,000. If those were the values at the time of the auction and you were aware of both the PCGS and NGC values, that $120,000 PR68 valuation at PCGS must have made your bid a very tempting conservative gamble. The downside is that it could have come back as a PCGS PF67 @ $35,000!
Who says that @tradedollarnut was willing to cross the coin as a PCGS PR67 and accept the downside of that grade?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@tradedollarnut said:
Are they wrong? I paid $57k to buy this coin in an NGC 68* holder
But it does beg the question of which came first - the chicken or the egg? Did it realize $57,600 because everyone thought it was a 67+Cam and that was what the Pcgs price guide said? Or is it that’s the current true market value for said coin and the price guide just happened to be correct this time. Hmmm.
The current NGC price guide places the value of a PR67 at $25,000 and a PR68 at $60,000. If those were the values at the time of the auction and you were aware of both the PCGS and NGC values, that $120,000 PR68 valuation at PCGS must have made your bid a very tempting conservative gamble. The downside is that it could have come back as a PCGS PF67 @ $35,000!
Who says that @tradedollarnut was willing to cross the coin as a PCGS PR67 and accept the downside of that grade?
As a matter of fact my minimum grade was 67+ Cam. That was the accurate grade in my opinion. And I’ve seen a LOT of high grade trade dollars
Maybe the price, high or low, isn't wrong but rather the actual attempt to price it. With such limited info, taking a stab at value is an error in and of itself.
There should be defined parameters with respect to data points for establishing value. The more data points, the tighter the price range. The less data points, the broader the range. Limited or no relevant data, no attempt at pricing.
@Peasantry said:
Maybe the price, high or low, isn't wrong but rather the actual attempt to price it. With such limited info, taking a stab at value is an error in and of itself.
There should be defined parameters with respect to data points for establishing value. The more data points, the tighter the price range. The less data points, the broader the range. Limited or no relevant data, no attempt at pricing.
This should be software not guess work.
If guess work was eliminated there might be more complaints about all of the coins without listed values than there are now about inaccurate ones.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I agree with your concerns. I certainly would offer more than the $32,500 new pricing for the 1827 P/C-66 if I am currently pursuing it but right now I am pursuing gold coins at the moment. The market is very fixated on gold coins.
I suspect PCGS is setting up the 1827 dimes up for a “future price rise” when there is a future perception of a strong market in these dimes. Right now, the coin hobby is not even looking at the capped bust dimes (just like me) so a price decline is not even noticed by the coin hobby because gold is so strong.
I also think that PCGS is possibly observing a weakness in MS-63 capped bust dimes so PCGS is dropping prices in MS-64 through MS-66 dimes even though there has been no activity in the upper mint state ones.
I still have my
1834 PCGS/CAC OGH MS-67 Lovejoy dime and very content to hang onto it. Since no one is looking to sell their MS-66 or 67 dimes I am not pushing any bids to drive the market up. These dimes are lower in PCGS than they were 10 years ago,
@scubafuel said:
I think an interesting pricing model would be based on a “wiki”.
Let anyone with a PCGS membership enter prices for any coin/grade in the PCGS database, and take the weighted average with a limit for outliers.
I bet this would end up being more accurate over time than the current pricing database.
Meaningless, ignorant guesses don't average out to valid numbers. The data is iony meaningful if those numbers entered are offers to buy or sell. And even then you run the risk of bargain hunters or aspirational selling destroying the validity of the numbers.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Price guides should show a range for each grade, e.g ($32,000 - $40,000). That takes into account low quality and high quality, slight changes in demand, overall coin market health, and other factors.
@philographer said:
Price guides should show a range for each grade, e.g ($32,000 - $40,000). That takes into account low quality and high quality, slight changes in demand, overall coin market health, and other factors.
Because collectors are Incapable of adding and subtracting 10% to the number? Price guides are GUIDES, they aren't your mother spoon-feeding you. It's not that hard to figure out how to use them and when to not use them.
And when you have a range that you couldn't calculate on your own, are you able to figure out where in the range you're supposed to be?
Note: that's a generic "you" not you personally
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@philographer said:
Price guides should show a range for each grade, e.g ($32,000 - $40,000). That takes into account low quality and high quality, slight changes in demand, overall coin market health, and other factors.
Because collectors are Incapable of adding and subtracting 10% to the number? Price guides are GUIDES, they aren't your mother spoon-feeding you. It's not that hard to figure out how to use them and when to not use them.
And when you have a range that you couldn't calculate on your own, are you able to figure out where in the range you're supposed to be?
Additionally, coins of the same grade can trade at such widely varying prices that for many of them, the price ranges would need to be so large that they wouldn’t be of much practical use, anyway.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Years ago I was in a rural area and a shop had an 1824 Large cent that graded XF45. A lightly traded coin and Greysheet was inadequate to figure the pricing on. I should have priced it higher at a subsequent show where a much more savvy dealer saw it as a tough coin and bought it at a break even price. Another time I stopped at a rural shop in NC that had an 1895-s $10 in unc. the guy wanted cash for which I did not have in hand. I came back a little later after going to an atm for cash but it was too late, the guy said the price had gone up because he looked it up.
The CDN says that the "...coins may be raw or certified but the grading must adhere to the current leading standard....we do not represent that it is possible to buy or sell at the published levels."
@philographer said:
Price guides should show a range for each grade, e.g ($32,000 - $40,000). That takes into account low quality and high quality, slight changes in demand, overall coin market health, and other factors.
Because collectors are Incapable of adding and subtracting 10% to the number? Price guides are GUIDES, they aren't your mother spoon-feeding you. It's not that hard to figure out how to use them and when to not use them.
And when you have a range that you couldn't calculate on your own, are you able to figure out where in the range you're supposed to be?
Additionally, coins of the same grade can trade at such widely varying prices that for many of them, the price ranges would need to be so large that they wouldn’t be of much practical use, anyway.
And you know what would happen: sellers would price at the top of the range, buyers would offer at the bottom of the range, and there would be more complaints than now.
And,especially for coins like the infrequently traded ones that started this thread, how would you establish the range? It is hard enough to estimate a price for a coin that hasn't had an example sell in 5 years. Now I need a formula that sets a range based on no data in the last 5 years.
It's also worth pointing out, for those that don't know, the guides are established largely based on mathematical formulas and raw data. It's not 10 experts in a room arguing over the values. That's why they work better for frequently traded widgets: statistics work better when there is a large data set.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@oreville - 1834 PCGS/CAC OGH MS-67 Lovejoy dime and very content to hang onto it. Since no one is looking to sell their MS-66 or 67 dimes I am not pushing any bids to drive the market up. These dimes are lower in PCGS than they were 10 years ago, I didnt know that you had that one. I know who has the other 67s so all accounted for. Love it and I love that coin. When I read which one you had I had to go see it in the Lovejoy catalog.
To all - I am not saying that a dealer shouldn't make money buying or selling coins. Dealers can price out coins as they wish and sell coins to those that wish to buy those coins. What I am saying is those publishers of price guides, the prices listed in those guides should be as realistic as possible. On frequently traded coins, its easier to price and on less frequently coins, its much harder to price. When prices are changed on those coins, there should be a firm bases for the change. In some cases, I admit that I might not be looking at the data as closely as the publishers do. In those cases, the publishers should educate the collectors on why a price has changed. Imagine that a 1913 Liberty nickel price guide price goes down $500k without any trades, Some collectors might be interested in knowing their reasoning behind their thinking.
All, I can't understand why price guide's prices are so different (CAC vs PCGS) for pretty much the same coins. It just doesn't make sense. This is true for not those that trade infrequently. Alot of dealers are saying that price guides are way behind the market. I believe that is very true for many series. Is that fair to users of price guides? Its fair for those that trade coins in a particular series frequently but not fair to those collectors that don't follow the market as closely.
@oreville - 1834 PCGS/CAC OGH MS-67 Lovejoy dime and very content to hang onto it. Since no one is looking to sell their MS-66 or 67 dimes I am not pushing any bids to drive the market up. These dimes are lower in PCGS than they were 10 years ago, I didnt know that you had that one. I know who has the other 67s so all accounted for. Love it and I love that coin. When I read which one you had I had to go see it in the Lovejoy catalog.
To all - I am not saying that a dealer shouldn't make money buying or selling coins. Dealers can price out coins as they wish and sell coins to those that wish to buy those coins. What I am saying is those publishers of price guides, the prices listed in those guides should be as realistic as possible. On frequently traded coins, its easier to price and on less frequently coins, its much harder to price. When prices are changed on those coins, there should be a firm bases for the change. In some cases, I admit that I might not be looking at the data as closely as the publishers do. In those cases, the publishers should educate the collectors on why a price has changed. Imagine that a 1913 Liberty nickel price guide price goes down $500k without any trades, Some collectors might be interested in knowing their reasoning behind their thinking.
All, I can't understand why price guide's prices are so different (CAC vs PCGS) for pretty much the same coins. It just doesn't make sense. This is true for not those that trade infrequently. Alot of dealers are saying that price guides are way behind the market. I believe that is very true for many series. Is that fair to users of price guides? Its fair for those that trade coins in a particular series frequently but not fair to those collectors that don't follow the market as closely.
There is no "reasoning". There's a formula and there is data. The different guides may have different data and almost definitely have a different formula.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Ultimately, unlike 30 years or so or earlier, you can check actual sales prices in real time as well as ongoing sales/auctions at numerous web locations.
That's more important than stale or inaccurate pricing in any guide.
@Peasantry said:
Maybe the price, high or low, isn't wrong but rather the actual attempt to price it. With such limited info, taking a stab at value is an error in and of itself.
There should be defined parameters with respect to data points for establishing value. The more data points, the tighter the price range. The less data points, the broader the range. Limited or no relevant data, no attempt at pricing.
This should be software not guess work.
I like the idea, but data points should be established based on actual sales or offers... then, maybe conditional formatting: green font for coins that trade frequently and there are many data points for; yellow for coins that have recent trading data but don't trade as frequently; red font for coins that have limited data or extrapolated data based on other coins with similar mintages and collector bases... just a thought.
Collecting: Dansco 7070; Middle Date Large Cents (VF-AU); Box of 20;
It's not fair to throw stones at the people who work on price guides because you are not pleased with the numbers they estimate for thinly traded material. If there has not been a publicly reported transaction for a coin in a given grade for many years, how do you put a price on it? You can’t. It can only be estimated by a transaction between two interested parties.
Other factors get involved too, like marketing advertising. The more private the sale, the less likely it is that it will go for a record price unless the seller has found the ultimate customer.
Prices guides are just that, guides. They give you and idea as to what something is worth. Some unique items because of absolute or condition rarity are hard to price. You can do what the old Red Books did with items like 1804 Dollars and 1913 Liberty Nickels. You can give the last auction results. Beyond that, it’s guess work.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Guides are never offers to buy and sell, but they are used that way. For these high end coins in this thread a dealer may bid strong for a specific coin becasue he/she has a buyer that wants it. It might be the only good one out of the 10 graded the same grade, right holder, stickered and exceptional eye appeal. It's impossible for the guides to account for that.
@BillJones said:
It's not fair to throw stones at the people who work on price guides because you are not pleased with the numbers they estimate for thinly traded material. If there has not been a publicly reported transaction for a coin in a given grade for many years, how do you put a price on it? You can’t. It can only be estimated by a transaction between two interested parties.
Other factors get involved too, like marketing advertising. The more private the sale, the less likely it is that it will go for a record price unless the seller has found the ultimate customer.
Prices guides are just that, guides. They give you and idea as to what something is worth. Some unique items because of absolute or condition rarity are hard to price. You can do what the old Red Books did with items like 1804 Dollars and 1913 Liberty Nickels. You can give the last auction results. Beyond that, it’s guess work.
@BillJones Hi Bill - - I am not throwing stones at anyone nor telling anyone that they aren't doing a great job. First off, I hear from my dealers and collectors friends that the price guides are way behind the real prices (Not just high eye appeal coins). Secondly, I can't believe that CACG price guides in many coin series are way below other price guides (generally I feel that CAC coins tend to tend higher than other price guide services). third, in our world with so much financial data out there, the price guides aren't incorporating it as timely as it should and fourth, price changes aren't explain to the public. We need to understand why a price is lowered or increased. I just want these services to raise their bars and add more clarity to our system that we all rely on. Think about this - Lets say someone (a spouse of a collector) that owns a 1827 p66 dime goes to a dealer to sell the coin to the dealer. The dealer shows the CACG price guide at $19,500 and offers a price based on that price. The dealer can sell the coin the very next day at $35k or so. The dealer clearly took advantage of the spouse. Reason - 2 price guides are way different. If one price guide shows $32k and the other $35k, then I get it but such a difference in price. BTW- there are many examples of this happening in all the price guides not the one's I am referring too in my posts. The folks that publish the price guides are the "Coin Pros" not coin amateurs.
@BillJones said:
"If there has not been a publicly reported transaction for a coin in a given grade for many years, how do you put a price on it? You can’t."
Exactly! You can't and shouldn't.
It makes no sense whatsoever to identify a void of information about any subject and think to yourself, "I'll make something up."
Transparent, data driven valuations are the only logical way forward. Seeking some self anointed, high priest of coin pricing to ask him "Why?" feels one step away placing the coin in an Ouija board planchette and determining its value.
@BillJones said:
"If there has not been a publicly reported transaction for a coin in a given grade for many years, how do you put a price on it? You can’t."
Exactly! You can't and shouldn't.
It makes no sense whatsoever to identify a void of information about any subject and think to yourself, "I'll make something up."
Transparent, data driven valuations are the only logical way forward. Seeking some self anointed, high priest of coin pricing to ask him "Why?" feels one step away placing the coin in an Ouija board planchette and determining its value.
Classic rarities are priced through comparative valuation all the time. You take the last one that sold and say “this is worth about the same” or less or more and you assume a value. Nothing wrong with that method
@BillJones said:
"If there has not been a publicly reported transaction for a coin in a given grade for many years, how do you put a price on it? You can’t."
Exactly! You can't and shouldn't.
It makes no sense whatsoever to identify a void of information about any subject and think to yourself, "I'll make something up."
Transparent, data driven valuations are the only logical way forward. Seeking some self anointed, high priest of coin pricing to ask him "Why?" feels one step away placing the coin in an Ouija board planchette and determining its value.
Classic rarities are priced through comparative valuation all the time. You take the last one that sold and say “this is worth about the same” or less or more and you assume a value. Nothing wrong with that method
This. And you also may have dealer bids in one of the exchanges. Those bids are likely speculative and may explain why some price estimates are low.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
@BillJones said:
It's not fair to throw stones at the people who work on price guides because you are not pleased with the numbers they estimate for thinly traded material. If there has not been a publicly reported transaction for a coin in a given grade for many years, how do you put a price on it? You can’t. It can only be estimated by a transaction between two interested parties.
Other factors get involved too, like marketing advertising. The more private the sale, the less likely it is that it will go for a record price unless the seller has found the ultimate customer.
Prices guides are just that, guides. They give you and idea as to what something is worth. Some unique items because of absolute or condition rarity are hard to price. You can do what the old Red Books did with items like 1804 Dollars and 1913 Liberty Nickels. You can give the last auction results. Beyond that, it’s guess work.
@BillJones Hi Bill - - I am not throwing stones at anyone nor telling anyone that they aren't doing a great job. First off, I hear from my dealers and collectors friends that the price guides are way behind the real prices (Not just high eye appeal coins). Secondly, I can't believe that CACG price guides in many coin series are way below other price guides (generally I feel that CAC coins tend to tend higher than other price guide services). third, in our world with so much financial data out there, the price guides aren't incorporating it as timely as it should and fourth, price changes aren't explain to the public. We need to understand why a price is lowered or increased. I just want these services to raise their bars and add more clarity to our system that we all rely on. Think about this - Lets say someone (a spouse of a collector) that owns a 1827 p66 dime goes to a dealer to sell the coin to the dealer. The dealer shows the CACG price guide at $19,500 and offers a price based on that price. The dealer can sell the coin the very next day at $35k or so. The dealer clearly took advantage of the spouse. Reason - 2 price guides are way different. If one price guide shows $32k and the other $35k, then I get it but such a difference in price. BTW- there are many examples of this happening in all the price guides not the one's I am referring too in my posts. The folks that publish the price guides are the "Coin Pros" not coin amateurs.
You obviously are in a much more rarified atmosphere than I. Yes I have bought and sold a quite a few coins in the 5 figure range, but only two or three in the 6 figure range. I also value rarity over condition. I don’t collect junk, but my usual range is usually in the AU to lower MS range.
I would rather have a great looking Chain Cent than an MS-67 or 68 far more common coin. I can’t relate to those pieces and huge premiums they bring, often because of the influence of the registries. I learned more than a decade ago that registry game is like a dog chasing its tail. It gets old and expensive very fast.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
The guides are only really good for commodity coins that trade in abundance, are present in those grades on pretty much any show bourse and for relative pricing. And I would also caution on relying on auction prices realized, even current ones and even for the same exact certified coin for truly rare ones. They can be both too high and too low for the current buyer/seller relationship. Some have sold at huge bargains in auction. That is not just the nature of auctions but a lot of other details. For instance, I know of an extreme rarity, where there are only three known and two appeared in the same auction along with a lot of other big money coins, that a limited bidder pile of money were chasing. One of the two went for a small fraction of its value. It subsequently traded several times in less than a year among knowledgeable dealers, So the last guy brings it public again and the buyer ASSUMES he was the winning bidder earlier in the year and has little into the coin. The reality is that he might have paid triple that by the time it got to him, and he was actually asking a fair market price for a coin the buyer might never see again. Then there is the expenses that might be baked into coins that have undergone extensive and expensive crossover and regrade attempts with CAC stickering stops too. There can be a lot of overhead into a coin that is important as a rarity, condition rarity, or that presents exceptionally. Too many collectors end up with lackluster cabinets of coins because they pass on those, believing them to be so far outside of greysheet to be ripoffs. That is not to say there are no ripoffs out there. In any hobby that involves money, there will be predators. And we all overpay or bury ourselves in coins that we've submitted to death. I learned to take those losses and move on myself. But in the end, guides are not the be all and end all, but just rough guides. Nice coins will defy the guides.
Where I learned this lesson big time was in the Eliasberg sale, quite a while back now. I faxed in what I thought were very generous bids on my sheet. I lost on every one on them and was only close on a couple. It was not just the provenance. There were rarities that were simply never seen on the market in a collector's lifetime and some of incredible presentation. None of the guides at the time were in the ballpark, most not updating significantly in years when a coin hasn't been on the market for years. I thought the prices realized were absurd at the time. But with exceptions, the really tough stuff continued to trade up. It also seemed to delineate when the coin market finally emerged from the doldrums.
@EastonCollection said: @oreville - 1834 PCGS/CAC OGH MS-67 Lovejoy dime and very content to hang onto it. Since no one is looking to sell their MS-66 or 67 dimes I am not pushing any bids to drive the market up. These dimes are lower in PCGS than they were 10 years ago, I didnt know that you had that one. I know who has the other 67s so all accounted for. Love it and I love that coin. When I read which one you had I had to go see it in the Lovejoy catalog.
To all - I am not saying that a dealer shouldn't make money buying or selling coins. Dealers can price out coins as they wish and sell coins to those that wish to buy those coins. What I am saying is those publishers of price guides, the prices listed in those guides should be as realistic as possible. On frequently traded coins, its easier to price and on less frequently coins, its much harder to price. When prices are changed on those coins, there should be a firm bases for the change. In some cases, I admit that I might not be looking at the data as closely as the publishers do. In those cases, the publishers should educate the collectors on why a price has changed. Imagine that a 1913 Liberty nickel price guide price goes down $500k without any trades, Some collectors might be interested in knowing their reasoning behind their thinking.
All, I can't understand why price guide's prices are so different (CAC vs PCGS) for pretty much the same coins. It just doesn't make sense. This is true for not those that trade infrequently. Alot of dealers are saying that price guides are way behind the market. I believe that is very true for many series. Is that fair to users of price guides? Its fair for those that trade coins in a particular series frequently but not fair to those collectors that don't follow the market as closely.
Just to assist others without the Lovejoy catalogue, the one I have is the 1834 small 4. I was on a kick to acquire as many high mint state dime type coins.
I have my own "guide". If I don't agree with the price/value i just let it go. I really do not have a "gotta have it at any cost" concern. But more power to dealers who make their sales.
Successful transactions:Tookybandit. "Everyone is equal, some are more equal than others".
The PCGS and CAC price guides appear to be free. How much do you suppose people would be willing to pay for a guide that's more accurate? Do you suppose there'd be enough people willing to pay that someone would consider investing the time and resources to create such a price guide?
@BillJones said:
"If there has not been a publicly reported transaction for a coin in a given grade for many years, how do you put a price on it? You can’t."
Exactly! You can't and shouldn't.
It makes no sense whatsoever to identify a void of information about any subject and think to yourself, "I'll make something up."
Transparent, data driven valuations are the only logical way forward. Seeking some self anointed, high priest of coin pricing to ask him "Why?" feels one step away placing the coin in an Ouija board planchette and determining its value.
Point being that you can. And in many instances you should
Comments
Sorry but I can already see that this will be a little long .
I see a couple comments on not including GC in the pcgs auction and/or price results. This is also true for Greysheet. However, this comment I believe should be directed towards GC as they do Not release their auction records in bulk to anyone. Therefore, as I understand it, to use the data would require going to GC website and pulling individual results and not being able to necessarily link to the auction result information. Heritage and Stacks and others do allow their results to be 'bulk' used and therefore are seen in the auction records of other sites like pcgs and greysheet/CDN.
@winesteven Now look what you did. j/k
Many of the CDN values now (emphasis on now) do not agree with the numbers you quoted above. Why? Well an example is below. These are the wholesale CAC.
$2000 change to $2200 on 11/25/25 and then change on 11/28/25 (today for this post) to $5500. with a CAC CPG $6250.
It appears many others other than the ones you mentioned were also updated.
@winesteven Yes, your post on the greysheet or CDN versus CPG is correct. This is for both the CAC and non-CAC.
Greysheet defines their CPG to be a proprietary formula (or factor) based off of their greysheet (wholesale) value to generate a CPG (retail) number. Typically this value ranges from around 1.35 times the greysheet (wholesale) for lower value coins to about 1.20 times the greysheet (wholesale) value for higher priced coins. As CDN states when the greysheet (wholesale) value is changed the CPG (retail) value will change with it. This is done independently for CAC and then non-CAC coins.
Next perhaps another question to ask is why should different price guides agree? One answer might be when they represent the same thing. But then how the prices are determined could also generate differences.
Looking at what the pcgs and greysheet represent:
PCGS states that their price guide represents:
"The prices listed in the PCGS Price Guide are average dealer asking prices for PCGS-graded coins."
From: https://www.pcgs.com/prices
This does Not distinguish between pcgs non-cac and pcgs cac. In some cases this difference could be small at 10% or less. But in other cases it could be much larger at 50% or 100% (twice as much) or maybe even more on select cases. Also the average dealer asking prices in some cases could be somewhat iffy.
CDN - greysheet does distinguish between non-cac and cac approved coins where such coins are available. However, CDN does not distinguish between NGC and PCGS for cac approved or not cac approved. Similar to the pcgs non-cac versus pcgs cac, the difference between an NGC and PCGS or NGC cac and PCGS cac can be small at 10% or less. But again sometimes the difference can be much larger (50% or 100% twice as much) and this for similar coins not some special toned coin or similar.
I will also note that, as I recall, John F has stated somewhere in a video as I recall, that CDN will typically error on the side of a lower price guide value when data is limited or there is a divergence of the data.
So from this, these two price guides might not be representing the same thing.
@EastonCollection
You mentioned/asked why did pcgs lower the price on the 10c 1827 MS66.
Perhaps another question to ask is why did CDN also lower the price? Here is the information on that and these are CAC greysheet (wholesale).
Oct 2019 $24,000.
Oct 2020 $20,000.
June 25, 2025 $27,500.
Nov 25, 2025 $16250. (with CPG $19500) ********* price reduced
Nov 28, 2025 $17,380. with CPG $21,000.
Like winesteven's above the value was updated today (as of this post) to a slightly higher value compared to the OP.
So why did both price guides reduce the value?
I don't know but could a bid have been pulled or something similar?
The most recent auction record I see is for a non-cac NGC from SB 8/13/24 at $12,000. which CDN could use for their non-cac valuation. Could this impact the perceived CDN cac approved value? I don't know.
@TrickleCharge
Yes, the pcgs auction prices realized has not done well in recent years. It is more than just the sorting. Since about 2023 pcgs auction prices realized has been generally slow to post auction results and they are also not posting as many auction results as in years past. Currently the last Heritage auction results are from July 2025 and Stacks Sept 2025 (and if one tracks eBay those are Aug 2025). Don't know if anything has changed for access to Goldbergs, Scottsman and DLRC but those have not been included since 2023. Additionally the number of auctions included from particularly Heritage but also Stacks has gone down. It is now mainly the more significant auctions whereas previously the included some of the weekly auctions or specialty auctions.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=hYCRaWPlTIE Sophie Lloyd, guitar shred cover of Panama (Van Halen)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=dOV1VrDuUm4 Ted Nugent, Hibernation, Live 1976
RLJ 1958 - 2023
Price guides are pretty close to accurate on the highest volume sales coins; for example Morgan and Peace dollars, Moderns where you could back up a semi trailer to a major show and fill it.
Please don’t apologize for your thorough and informative post.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It's quite a paradox, guides are used every day but how can they be "accurate" in a business model where prices change everyday based on supply and demand and many other factors.. I think one must get as much information availalbe before buying or selling and join the game!
Now if "insiders" (strategy moves or non movements if the case may be) are changing the rules, that's a different game, Some will play some won't..
Guides do work on lower end stuff, how do I know that a 1916 D merc. dime in a PCGS good 04 holder is worth a grand and the same coin in a PCGS AG03 holder is worth $750
Thanks for your analysis. Yes, figures do change regularly. The figures i showed for the Proof Barber Dimes were taken just very early this morning from the CAC price Report. Are you instead referring to my example in a lower post showing actual figures for a MS64 coin I'm watching that is not a Proof Barber Dime? Perhaps the actual CAC Price Report (based on Greysheet figures) doesn't incorporate those changes as often as the raw numbers are updated? Am I misinterpreting what you stated? If not, then the problem described by the OP stands, since the CAC Price Report is online, and therefore should be updated at the same time and frequency as the raw Greysheet data that it's based on? If not, that's not good, as the OP and I indicate.
Please clarify.
Thanks.
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
I should have stated my comment better. I'm aware that GC chooses not to provide their data. And I'm not really complaining. Just makes it a little more time consuming in researching data to come up with my own idea on a particular coins worth.
Are they wrong? I paid $57k to buy this coin in an NGC 68* holder
I just downgrade crossed it to PCGS 67+ Cameo. Price guide $57,500
I really appreciated reading through this thread @EastonCollection and glad you started it. Still trying to catch up with some of the one's I missed while I was off and away in NZ.
One of my pet peeves with the PCGS price guide (in particular) SHOULD be an easy fix, but it never seems to happen. It involves Capped Bust Halves that have been attributed on the holder. There are multiple cases where the "Base Price" exceeds the "Attributed Pricing".
As an example (see below), the "Base Price" shows the 1818 as $550. (EF40) / $2000. (AU55) / $4000. (MS60) coin, but in almost every case, if the coin is in an attributed holder (showing the Overton #), the coin will show up priced for less (typically $400/1250/3000).
Which leads to the question of what exactly is the point? just more confusion on pricing. Anyone who enters the cert # on one of the attributed coins will be shown prices that are less than the supposed "Most Common", or "Base Price" coin without attribution.
Believe me, as of right now, 1818 is NOT the only year suffering from this transgression.
From a very basic coding standpoint, IF basegradeprice > attrgradeprice, then set attrgradeprice = basegradeprice
That at least gives all EF40 graded CBH's of that year a minimum of the price shown for the unattributed examples.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
I haven’t read through all the comments, but here’s a thought.
We’re not really dealing with an aspect of coin collecting, we’re dealing with statistics deviation. Anytime something shows up on the market with regularity you’re going to have more reliable data than you will if it shows up infrequently. Any coin that lands solidly within the standard distribution will be (usually) easier to quantify because you have more data points. Any coin that falls in the top or bottom of the measured data will have fewer data points, therefore less reliability.
Most very high end coin collectors understand this principle either intuitively or intellectually.
Even if a grading company does is very very best and spends an inordinate amount of time and effort on their price guide is going to miss on the infrequent things, it would normally happen in any statistical measurement, regardless of what it is.
What you’re saying is that a coin that shows up on the market every ten ten years or so doesn’t have a reliable data set. You’re right, it doesn’t. It can’t reliably have one. Price guides in that range must, by definition, just be an idea of what might be expected if one did come to the market, not a measurement of what the market will actually support.
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
But it does beg the question of which came first - the chicken or the egg? Did it realize $57,600 because everyone thought it was a 67+Cam and that was what the Pcgs price guide said? Or is it that’s the current true market value for said coin and the price guide just happened to be correct this time. Hmmm.
TPG price guides have always been a joke IMO. Never anywhere close to reality. RGDS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Wooooha! Did someone just say it's officially "TACO™" Tuesday????
How often do you read, right here on this message board, that someone is buried in a coin because the amount of his winning bid was $$$ more than what's in the price guide? Or a seller is mocked because the price marked on a coin he's selling is $$$ more than the price guide?
Some people take price guides seriously.
I see I left out a key part of the information. I was referring to the 1901 10c PR67 CAM CAC.
It was at $2000. (wholesale).
It was changed to S2200. (wholesale) on 11/25/25 (although their price history chart indicates this was back in 2021)
Note: this was probably the $2750. (retail) that you quoted in your post from the CAC website (CDN factor would have been 2750/2200 = 1.25 for CDN wholesale to retail)
On the CDN webpage and app I now (11/28/2025) see a greysheet of $5000. (wholesale) or $6250. (retail).
"
So I was joking (although I kind of suspect that it might be actually why) that you caused this price jump with your reporting of what you paid in the post. That was the "Now look at what you did. j/k
Note: It does still show $2750. on the CAC website but that is not what the CDN webpage is showing so there is apparently some delay. Should be coming soon to a theater near to you.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=hYCRaWPlTIE Sophie Lloyd, guitar shred cover of Panama (Van Halen)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=dOV1VrDuUm4 Ted Nugent, Hibernation, Live 1976
RLJ 1958 - 2023
The current NGC price guide places the value of a PR67 at $25,000 and a PR68 at $60,000. If those were the values at the time of the auction and you were aware of both the PCGS and NGC values, that $120,000 PR68 valuation at PCGS must have made your bid a very tempting conservative gamble. The downside is that it could have come back as a PCGS PF67 @ $35,000!
Who says that @tradedollarnut was willing to cross the coin as a PCGS PR67 and accept the downside of that grade?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think an interesting pricing model would be based on a “wiki”.
Let anyone with a PCGS membership enter prices for any coin/grade in the PCGS database, and take the weighted average with a limit for outliers.
I bet this would end up being more accurate over time than the current pricing database.
As a matter of fact my minimum grade was 67+ Cam. That was the accurate grade in my opinion. And I’ve seen a LOT of high grade trade dollars
Maybe the price, high or low, isn't wrong but rather the actual attempt to price it. With such limited info, taking a stab at value is an error in and of itself.
There should be defined parameters with respect to data points for establishing value. The more data points, the tighter the price range. The less data points, the broader the range. Limited or no relevant data, no attempt at pricing.
This should be software not guess work.
If guess work was eliminated there might be more complaints about all of the coins without listed values than there are now about inaccurate ones.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@EastonCollection:
I agree with your concerns. I certainly would offer more than the $32,500 new pricing for the 1827 P/C-66 if I am currently pursuing it but right now I am pursuing gold coins at the moment. The market is very fixated on gold coins.
I suspect PCGS is setting up the 1827 dimes up for a “future price rise” when there is a future perception of a strong market in these dimes. Right now, the coin hobby is not even looking at the capped bust dimes (just like me) so a price decline is not even noticed by the coin hobby because gold is so strong.
I also think that PCGS is possibly observing a weakness in MS-63 capped bust dimes so PCGS is dropping prices in MS-64 through MS-66 dimes even though there has been no activity in the upper mint state ones.
I still have my
1834 PCGS/CAC OGH MS-67 Lovejoy dime and very content to hang onto it. Since no one is looking to sell their MS-66 or 67 dimes I am not pushing any bids to drive the market up. These dimes are lower in PCGS than they were 10 years ago,
Meaningless, ignorant guesses don't average out to valid numbers. The data is iony meaningful if those numbers entered are offers to buy or sell. And even then you run the risk of bargain hunters or aspirational selling destroying the validity of the numbers.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Price guides should show a range for each grade, e.g ($32,000 - $40,000). That takes into account low quality and high quality, slight changes in demand, overall coin market health, and other factors.
He who knows he has enough is rich.
Because collectors are Incapable of adding and subtracting 10% to the number? Price guides are GUIDES, they aren't your mother spoon-feeding you. It's not that hard to figure out how to use them and when to not use them.
And when you have a range that you couldn't calculate on your own, are you able to figure out where in the range you're supposed to be?
Note: that's a generic "you" not you personally
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Additionally, coins of the same grade can trade at such widely varying prices that for many of them, the price ranges would need to be so large that they wouldn’t be of much practical use, anyway.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Years ago I was in a rural area and a shop had an 1824 Large cent that graded XF45. A lightly traded coin and Greysheet was inadequate to figure the pricing on. I should have priced it higher at a subsequent show where a much more savvy dealer saw it as a tough coin and bought it at a break even price. Another time I stopped at a rural shop in NC that had an 1895-s $10 in unc. the guy wanted cash for which I did not have in hand. I came back a little later after going to an atm for cash but it was too late, the guy said the price had gone up because he looked it up.
The CDN says that the "...coins may be raw or certified but the grading must adhere to the current leading standard....we do not represent that it is possible to buy or sell at the published levels."
And you know what would happen: sellers would price at the top of the range, buyers would offer at the bottom of the range, and there would be more complaints than now.
And,especially for coins like the infrequently traded ones that started this thread, how would you establish the range? It is hard enough to estimate a price for a coin that hasn't had an example sell in 5 years. Now I need a formula that sets a range based on no data in the last 5 years.
It's also worth pointing out, for those that don't know, the guides are established largely based on mathematical formulas and raw data. It's not 10 experts in a room arguing over the values. That's why they work better for frequently traded widgets: statistics work better when there is a large data set.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Pretty hard to top what @SimonW posted. You can't average out something that doesn't exist. james
Exactly
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Many may refer to a price guide but in the end for a seller cost plus will weigh in.
@oreville - 1834 PCGS/CAC OGH MS-67 Lovejoy dime and very content to hang onto it. Since no one is looking to sell their MS-66 or 67 dimes I am not pushing any bids to drive the market up. These dimes are lower in PCGS than they were 10 years ago, I didnt know that you had that one. I know who has the other 67s so all accounted for. Love it and I love that coin. When I read which one you had I had to go see it in the Lovejoy catalog.
To all - I am not saying that a dealer shouldn't make money buying or selling coins. Dealers can price out coins as they wish and sell coins to those that wish to buy those coins. What I am saying is those publishers of price guides, the prices listed in those guides should be as realistic as possible. On frequently traded coins, its easier to price and on less frequently coins, its much harder to price. When prices are changed on those coins, there should be a firm bases for the change. In some cases, I admit that I might not be looking at the data as closely as the publishers do. In those cases, the publishers should educate the collectors on why a price has changed. Imagine that a 1913 Liberty nickel price guide price goes down $500k without any trades, Some collectors might be interested in knowing their reasoning behind their thinking.
All, I can't understand why price guide's prices are so different (CAC vs PCGS) for pretty much the same coins. It just doesn't make sense. This is true for not those that trade infrequently. Alot of dealers are saying that price guides are way behind the market. I believe that is very true for many series. Is that fair to users of price guides? Its fair for those that trade coins in a particular series frequently but not fair to those collectors that don't follow the market as closely.
I> @EastonCollection said:
There is no "reasoning". There's a formula and there is data. The different guides may have different data and almost definitely have a different formula.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Ultimately, unlike 30 years or so or earlier, you can check actual sales prices in real time as well as ongoing sales/auctions at numerous web locations.
That's more important than stale or inaccurate pricing in any guide.
I like the idea, but data points should be established based on actual sales or offers... then, maybe conditional formatting: green font for coins that trade frequently and there are many data points for; yellow for coins that have recent trading data but don't trade as frequently; red font for coins that have limited data or extrapolated data based on other coins with similar mintages and collector bases... just a thought.
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
It's not fair to throw stones at the people who work on price guides because you are not pleased with the numbers they estimate for thinly traded material. If there has not been a publicly reported transaction for a coin in a given grade for many years, how do you put a price on it? You can’t. It can only be estimated by a transaction between two interested parties.
Other factors get involved too, like marketing advertising. The more private the sale, the less likely it is that it will go for a record price unless the seller has found the ultimate customer.
Prices guides are just that, guides. They give you and idea as to what something is worth. Some unique items because of absolute or condition rarity are hard to price. You can do what the old Red Books did with items like 1804 Dollars and 1913 Liberty Nickels. You can give the last auction results. Beyond that, it’s guess work.
Guides are never offers to buy and sell, but they are used that way. For these high end coins in this thread a dealer may bid strong for a specific coin becasue he/she has a buyer that wants it. It might be the only good one out of the 10 graded the same grade, right holder, stickered and exceptional eye appeal. It's impossible for the guides to account for that.
@BillJones Hi Bill - - I am not throwing stones at anyone nor telling anyone that they aren't doing a great job. First off, I hear from my dealers and collectors friends that the price guides are way behind the real prices (Not just high eye appeal coins). Secondly, I can't believe that CACG price guides in many coin series are way below other price guides (generally I feel that CAC coins tend to tend higher than other price guide services). third, in our world with so much financial data out there, the price guides aren't incorporating it as timely as it should and fourth, price changes aren't explain to the public. We need to understand why a price is lowered or increased. I just want these services to raise their bars and add more clarity to our system that we all rely on. Think about this - Lets say someone (a spouse of a collector) that owns a 1827 p66 dime goes to a dealer to sell the coin to the dealer. The dealer shows the CACG price guide at $19,500 and offers a price based on that price. The dealer can sell the coin the very next day at $35k or so. The dealer clearly took advantage of the spouse. Reason - 2 price guides are way different. If one price guide shows $32k and the other $35k, then I get it but such a difference in price. BTW- there are many examples of this happening in all the price guides not the one's I am referring too in my posts. The folks that publish the price guides are the "Coin Pros" not coin amateurs.
Exactly! You can't and shouldn't.
It makes no sense whatsoever to identify a void of information about any subject and think to yourself, "I'll make something up."
Transparent, data driven valuations are the only logical way forward. Seeking some self anointed, high priest of coin pricing to ask him "Why?" feels one step away placing the coin in an Ouija board planchette and determining its value.
Classic rarities are priced through comparative valuation all the time. You take the last one that sold and say “this is worth about the same” or less or more and you assume a value. Nothing wrong with that method
This. And you also may have dealer bids in one of the exchanges. Those bids are likely speculative and may explain why some price estimates are low.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
The consistency of the error does not support continuing it.
You obviously are in a much more rarified atmosphere than I. Yes I have bought and sold a quite a few coins in the 5 figure range, but only two or three in the 6 figure range. I also value rarity over condition. I don’t collect junk, but my usual range is usually in the AU to lower MS range.
I would rather have a great looking Chain Cent than an MS-67 or 68 far more common coin. I can’t relate to those pieces and huge premiums they bring, often because of the influence of the registries. I learned more than a decade ago that registry game is like a dog chasing its tail. It gets old and expensive very fast.
The guides are only really good for commodity coins that trade in abundance, are present in those grades on pretty much any show bourse and for relative pricing. And I would also caution on relying on auction prices realized, even current ones and even for the same exact certified coin for truly rare ones. They can be both too high and too low for the current buyer/seller relationship. Some have sold at huge bargains in auction. That is not just the nature of auctions but a lot of other details. For instance, I know of an extreme rarity, where there are only three known and two appeared in the same auction along with a lot of other big money coins, that a limited bidder pile of money were chasing. One of the two went for a small fraction of its value. It subsequently traded several times in less than a year among knowledgeable dealers, So the last guy brings it public again and the buyer ASSUMES he was the winning bidder earlier in the year and has little into the coin. The reality is that he might have paid triple that by the time it got to him, and he was actually asking a fair market price for a coin the buyer might never see again. Then there is the expenses that might be baked into coins that have undergone extensive and expensive crossover and regrade attempts with CAC stickering stops too. There can be a lot of overhead into a coin that is important as a rarity, condition rarity, or that presents exceptionally. Too many collectors end up with lackluster cabinets of coins because they pass on those, believing them to be so far outside of greysheet to be ripoffs. That is not to say there are no ripoffs out there. In any hobby that involves money, there will be predators. And we all overpay or bury ourselves in coins that we've submitted to death. I learned to take those losses and move on myself. But in the end, guides are not the be all and end all, but just rough guides. Nice coins will defy the guides.
Where I learned this lesson big time was in the Eliasberg sale, quite a while back now. I faxed in what I thought were very generous bids on my sheet. I lost on every one on them and was only close on a couple. It was not just the provenance. There were rarities that were simply never seen on the market in a collector's lifetime and some of incredible presentation. None of the guides at the time were in the ballpark, most not updating significantly in years when a coin hasn't been on the market for years. I thought the prices realized were absurd at the time. But with exceptions, the really tough stuff continued to trade up. It also seemed to delineate when the coin market finally emerged from the doldrums.
Just to assist others without the Lovejoy catalogue, the one I have is the 1834 small 4. I was on a kick to acquire as many high mint state dime type coins.
I have my own "guide". If I don't agree with the price/value i just let it go. I really do not have a "gotta have it at any cost" concern. But more power to dealers who make their sales.
It sounds like you’re assuming an error, when one might not have been made. And @Billjones didn’t post that - @tradedollarnut did.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The PCGS and CAC price guides appear to be free. How much do you suppose people would be willing to pay for a guide that's more accurate? Do you suppose there'd be enough people willing to pay that someone would consider investing the time and resources to create such a price guide?
You're correct. I'm terrible at navigating the quote feature.
Point being that you can. And in many instances you should
I see shifting values in your future
Values shift constantly. Shrug