is this an example of how 3rd party grading is good for our hobby and protects collectors?

classiccoin · November 6, 2006 3:59PM

Text

well they are the number one --value added-- cerification service so they claim.. i suppose the term --value added-- refers to turning a 33.00 coin which can still be ordered directly from the mint into a multi thousand dollar plastic wonder

notwilight · November 6, 2006 4:01PM

This has been discussed, applauded, questioned and celebrated in many threads. your disappointment is noted. --Jerry

classiccoin · November 6, 2006 4:03PM

well thank you notwilight.. i would assume a fellow pcgs instant lotto winner would support this

Bochiman · November 6, 2006 4:05PM

Calling it a $33 coin show your assumptions are erroneous. Hard to give credence to your disdain for the modern coins/bullion and TPG when you can't even do math

You assume, since the set is $100, that each coin is valued at 1/3 (roughly, $33), yet, the unc is sold separately for under $20 (from the USMint) and the regular proof is under $30. So, the reverse proof is AT LEAST a $50+ coin

TwoSides2aCoin · November 6, 2006 4:11PM

I guessed it would sell for much more.
Time will tell if that price was a bargain !

classiccoin · November 6, 2006 4:29PM

the more silver eagles and 2003 pennies that sell for moon money.. the more collectors become desensitized to the insanity of otherwise very inexpensive coins selling for multi thousands of dollars because of and only because of the plastic holder they are in.. when this house of cards inevitably collapses like they always do with any other overpriced collectible that has no inheirent value other than hype.. many millions of dollars will be lost by collectors and speculators

TwoSides2aCoin · November 6, 2006 10:47PM

<< the more silver eagles and 2003 pennies that sell for moon money.. the more collectors become desensitized to the insanity of otherwise very inexpensive coins selling for multi thousands of dollars because of and only because of the plastic holder they are in.. when this house of cards inevitably collapses like they always do with any other overpriced collectible that has no inheirent value other than hype.. many millions of dollars will be lost by collectors and speculators >>

Let me BLOW just one HOLE in your theory and ask :

WHICH PLASTIC HOLDER ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ?
This is an example that the TPGs never got a hold of YET ! What say you now about your words ?

One question: When you say "OVERPRICED", are you implying that it's overpriced for you or someone looking for the COIN, not the PLASTIC ?

MrEureka · November 6, 2006 10:58PM

...when this house of cards inevitably collapses like they always do with any other overpriced collectible that has no inheirent value other than hype

Some people can see the difference between 69 and 70 with reasonable consistency. That means that the quality difference is real, and that there is "inherent value". The real question is whether prices are sustainable. I tend to think not, but time will tell.

Coxe · November 6, 2006 11:21PM

Slightly off topic, but I think the obverse of that Mint medallion looks truly awful as a reverse proof. The reverse is nice. Wouldn't a nice error be a reverse proof reverse on a normal proof obverse? Better not give the US Mint any ideas though.

garsmith · November 6, 2006 11:24PM

<<is this an example of how 3rd party grading is good for our hobby and protects collectors?>>

From your rant I can't tell who you are mad at:

Are you mad at PCGS for doing thier job?
Are you mad at the seller for selling the coin at a price smoeone was willing to pay?
Are you mad at the buyer for paying the amount they valued the coin at?

From the auction bidding record you can see that the opening bid, by our own "2sides" was $200, so is it PCGS's or the sellers fault that the coin ended at $5,887.00. Pcgs had nothing to do with selling the coin or how it sold. from the ending price I would have to say the the seller started the auction well below a reasonable value for the coin so who is at fault here.

Conder101 · November 7, 2006 1:40AM

<< Some people can see the difference between 69 and 70 with reasonable consistency. That means that the quality difference is real, and that there is "inherent value". >>

Some people see UFO's with reasonable frequency, does that mean that aliens from outer space are real and that they are preparing to make contact with us soon?

Coxe · November 7, 2006 1:41AM

Good one, Conder!

MrEureka · November 7, 2006 1:42AM

Some people see UFO's with reasonable frequency, does that mean that aliens from outer space are real and that they are preparing to make contact with us soon?

There's a difference between "frequency" and "consistency". In this case, perhaps a small one, but there is a difference.

Russ · November 7, 2006 1:49AM

<< turning a 33.00 coin which can still be ordered directly from the mint into a multi thousand dollar plastic wonder >>

Ain't it great? Man, I love this country!

Russ, NCNE

19Lyds · November 7, 2006 2:03AM

This board just cracks me up!

People will whine about the weirdest things. Well, all I can say is James made a killing on selling that coin and the buyer has got to be one happy camper! Will the buyer whine in a couple years if the coin devalues by a grand or two? Probably not. Anybody that can afford to bid nearly $6,000 on 1 coin sure ain't gonna miss a couple a grand. I'm betting that the price stays up there though. Just look at the cost of PF70 IKE's. Heck, look at the PF70 95 SAE's.

The reality is that these things get priced by supply and demand and/or who gets one first! PCGS has no control over it. A 70 is a 70 and a 69 is something nobody is willing to pay moon money for.

Gemineye · November 7, 2006 2:29AM

Some have deeper pockets than others and some others have bigger holes in them than others.......

Zoins · November 7, 2006 2:31AM

I can just imagine the winner breaking it out of the slab and spending it - just like on Brewsters Millions!

notwilight · November 7, 2006 2:42AM

<< the more silver eagles and 2003 pennies that sell for moon money.. the more collectors become desensitized to the insanity of otherwise very inexpensive coins selling for multi thousands of dollars because of and only because of the plastic holder they are in.. when this house of cards inevitably collapses like they always do with any other overpriced collectible that has no inheirent value other than hype.. many millions of dollars will be lost by collectors and speculators >>

So you have a problem with condition rarety for moderns. Do you have the same probem with older coins? I own a 1794 large cent in VF25 worth a couple grand or less. Here is the PCGS price guide for the coin. Let's hope cut and paste doesn't yield gibberish:

1794 large cent: vf 25 $3750. MS 64 $60k

Would you have a problem if I sold an MS64 coin like this for 60k? You could have a very nice VF25 for less.

You'll come back and say there is very little difference between a 69 and a 70. Maybe that's right. Can you tell one grade difference in classic coins? We have lots of "guess the grade" posts with guesses all over by some of the same guys criticizing modern grades.

How about an 1880O morgan that goes from $8750 to $75k between 64 and 65? Why aren't you all over morgan collectors for this?

Have a nice day,

Jerry

Conder101 · November 7, 2006 3:16AM

<< There's a difference between "frequency" and "consistency". In this case, perhaps a small one, but there is a difference. >>

True, if you are seeing UFOs consistantly there is something wrong.

But those who see them frequently also seem to be consistant in what they see.

TwoSides2aCoin · November 7, 2006 3:32AM

<< 

<< There's a difference between "frequency" and "consistency". In this case, perhaps a small one, but there is a difference. >>

True, if you are seeing UFOs consistantly there is something wrong.

But those who see them frequently also seem to be consistant in what they see.

>>

Some believe without seeing, too

I love this country like Russ pointed out. And Kool Aid Tastes pretty good, too.

Russ · November 7, 2006 4:30AM

<< So you have a problem with condition rarety for moderns. Do you have the same probem with older coins? I own a 1794 large cent in VF25 worth a couple grand or less. Here is the PCGS price guide for the coin. Let's hope cut and paste doesn't yield gibberish:

1794 large cent: vf 25 $3750. MS 64 $60k

Would you have a problem if I sold an MS64 coin like this for 60k? You could have a very nice VF25 for less. >>

I have a better example than that. How about a spread of $40 to $38K at the same numerical grade?

Russ, NCNE

RYK · November 7, 2006 4:34AM

Any time a coin, modern or classic, is worth substantially more than the same issue one numerical grader lower, there is risk.

Russ · November 7, 2006 4:38AM

<< Any time a coin, modern or classic, is worth substantially more than the same issue one numerical grader lower, there is risk. >>

How about when it's the same numerical grade? And, it ain't a modern.

Russ, NCNE

Zoins · November 7, 2006 5:21AM

Think about it this way. TPGs and Ebay are providing a market for people with money to get together with people with the time and inclination to get First Strike 70 coins. The collector with lots of money to spend on coins can just buy what he wants without a lot of hassle. The collector without a lot of money can get lots of sets from the US Mint, submit for grading and make some money. I don't see any harm if people are spending responsibly.

notwilight · November 7, 2006 5:32AM

Ok. Russ, I give. How can a coin vary that much and still have the same number? thanks, Jerry

Russ · November 7, 2006 5:41AM

<< Ok. Russ, I give. How can a coin vary that much and still have the same number? >>

1945 Merc. MS67 - $40. MS67FB - $38,000.

Russ, NCNE

notwilight · November 7, 2006 5:55AM

Great example. Thanks, Jerry

is this an example of how 3rd party grading is good for our hobby and protects collectors?

Comments

Leave a Comment