<< <i>At the Baltimore Show, the only ones I saw using the sticker were Legend, their case was filled with stickered PCGS coins. >>
Did they have any raw slabs? If so, how did they look? I would be suspicious of any raw slabs that any dealer who specializes in CAC stickered slabs might have in his case. >>
I'm sure they did have raw slabs. However, I thought the sticker would be self-justification for higher prices, so I quickly moved on.
"There sure is alot of mincing of words and sidestepping going on over there in response to physics-fan. Kinda like "that depends on what the definition of "is" is."
Yes. Parsing is the phrase made famous by the guy in goose's post. And there is another master of it holding forth in that thread ATS.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
Not really. His use of the term "raw", in place of "those without a green piece of sticky plastic", was unfortunate, but not trend-inducing, except for the gullible.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>Not really. His use of the term "raw", in place of "those without a green piece of sticky plastic", was unfortunate, but not trend-inducing, except for the gullible. >>
yeah, but "the botch" has a special place in my heart.
I don't care an iota about the CAC sticker, but I am curious why some of you are eager to rip it with the exception of pharmer, he'd try to stink up a Sunday buffet if you let him in. We all know where he comes from. So what upsets you all so much about this concept? I don't see anyone ripping Lawrence for his star rating system or other dealers that put PQ or some other designation in their description. Come on fess up what really tightens up your backside so completely when this subject comes up.
Not much reason in this thread other than what Rick Snow said.
<< <i>I had an email conversation with John Albanese regarding this and other issues. Here is his response regarding this coin:
this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64 >>
IrishMike, your comparisons don't make sense. DL isn't putting his star designations on the coin holder and then charging people to do so. Neither are people who simply say their coins are PQ. CAC is actually charging people for a completely arbitrary PQ designation. It's a rip off.
Positive BST transactions with: too many names to list! 36 at last count.
<< <i>I don't care an iota about the CAC sticker, but I am curious why some of you are eager to rip it with the exception of pharmer, he'd try to stink up a Sunday buffet if you let him in. We all know where he comes from. So what upsets you all so much about this concept? I don't see anyone ripping Lawrence for his star rating system or other dealers that put PQ or some other designation in their description. Come on fess up what really tightens up your backside so completely when this subject comes up.
Not much reason in this thread other than what Rick Snow said. >>
what does David Lawrence charge for his star rating out of sheer curiousity?
<< <i>Hi Angry Mike. Rather than us bowing to your demands, you tell us what specifically you disagree with in this thread. It's all yours, Angry Mike. >>
C'mon Mike, you can do it. The floor is yours. Let's hear your grievances, one by one.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>Hi Angry Mike. Rather than us bowing to your demands, you tell us what specifically you disagree with in this thread. It's all yours, Angry Mike. >>
C'mon Mike, you can do it. The floor is yours. Let's hear your grievances, one by one. >>
<< <i>I don't care an iota about the CAC sticker, but I am curious why some of you are eager to rip it ... So what upsets you all so much about this concept? I don't see anyone ripping Lawrence for his star rating system or other dealers that put PQ or some other designation in their description. >>
hey irishmike, on the contrary, i think there is plenty of (justified) ripping on the idiocy of calling every coin in inventory "pq". take a look at steve estes inventory, or gus tiso. laughable! EVERY coin is "pq", whatever the he11 that means!
as for dlrc, they'v gotten their butts busted numerous times, again for the same crap, where EVERY coin is at least a "4 star" or "5 star". but go to sell your coins to dlrc, & all of a sudden, they are only "2 star" coins.
why does the cac idea suck? partly because it's run by rich-kid bozos, but mostly becuase it's flat out STUPID.
as is "pq"
as is "5 stars"
i'd have a he11uva lot of respect for a sticker applied by a consortium OF COLLECTORS.
ps: some rich people are outstanding collectors, not a rip on them.
<< <i>Hi Angry Mike. Rather than us bowing to your demands, you tell us what specifically you disagree with in this thread. It's all yours, Angry Mike. >>
C'mon, Mike. Tell us what you disagree with in this thread, rather than everyone explaining themselves to you.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
I am not going to judge whether or not the grade is accurate or the coin is PQ, but if I were PCGS, I would buy the coin, take it off the market, and make a big show of doing so. A shot across the bow for the CAC.
Ok, Mike, here's what makes this unacceptable to collectors. A conflict of interest is being created by having the same group who is grading the already-graded coins act as market-makers for the very same coins they happen be grading.
The promoters of this arrangement have tried to justify it by pointing to a "bifurcated market" in which only they can distinguish between PQ coins and dogs, thus only their coins should be worth a premium, which they fully intend to charge when they sell you one of their stickers, er, coins.
And of course, the collector pays the freight, in every case.
This would be like having the SEC issue stock, act as their own broker and act as the policeman for every other stock issue as well. How can this ever be good for collectors?
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
Ok, Mike, here's what makes this unacceptable to collectors. A conflict of interest is being created by having the same group who is grading the already-graded coins act as market-makers for the very same coins they happen be grading.
The promoters of this arrangement have tried to justify it by pointing to a "bifurcated market" in which only they can distinguish between PQ coins and dogs, thus only their coins should be worth a premium, which they fully intend to charge when they sell you one of their stickers, er, coins.
And of course, the collector pays the freight, in every case.
This would be like having the SEC issue stock, act as their own broker and act as the policeman for every other stock issue as well. How can this ever be good for collectors?
That's the best way I've ever heard it put. You're right on the money jmski, thank you for posting!
Positive BST transactions with: too many names to list! 36 at last count.
Always took candy from strangers Didn't wanna get me no trade Never want to be like papa Working for the boss every night and day --"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>"this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64"
So it's the price it brought that determines it's stickerability? That's a new blush. >>
Absent any other info [pics are not a good determination of quality of a mid grade unc coin], wouldn't you agree that price realized in auction is a good indication of how the coin looks in hand? >>
For the benefit of the responders to Karl's thread.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
I see the openings are squeezing tighter. Well duh it angers you because dealers are putting stickers on their own coins. Ok be angry it certainly won't bifurcate my market, and bet it won't yours either unless you bid on a cacker. Now again why is everyone so upset? I ain't a bit angry, the post was written as I was laughing at grown me getting so upset over something so silly. Do you really think someone with the money that is a serious collector of Buffs is going to give that sticker much thought?? Come on now just look at the responses in this thread by all the buff experts. Like I said its something to laff about now get so uptight over. Headed out for dinner, keep firing shells at me, I need some more chuckles. Will catch up with them in the am.... cheers.......not ricko.
<< <i>I am not going to judge whether or not the grade is accurate or the coin is PQ, but if I were PCGS, I would buy the coin, take it off the market, and make a big show of doing so. A shot across the bow for the CAC. >>
I haven't heard anything quite so devious in quite a while. Good work!
Hey, this thread may go to 1000! At least we know it won't go POOF, with all the negativity.
About this comment: Ok, Mike, here's what makes this unacceptable to collectors. A conflict of interest is being created by having the same group who is grading the already-graded coins act as market-makers for the very same coins they happen be grading.
It is not conflict of interest. The sticker identifies coins that the counsortium will buy at their bid. They have not gotten to the point of revealing their bids - they are all too busy buying coins and stocking them away for the release of their pricing structure. In any event, they are not a grading service at this point, and should not be looked upon as one (IMO). They are a market-making scheme which hopes to make a market based on the upper tier of the grade rather than the lower tier.
I agree that any dealer who is "Going CAC" has to be all in. You cannot list an inventory that is half stickered, or at least I don't think you can - they'll discover this soon.
<< <i>The CAC sticker is clearly a racket, promoted by the same people selling coins. Too much conflict of interest. >>
Worse than that, it is a way of starting a grading company on the cheap where most of the work has been done, grading, authentication, encapsulation, branding etc.., all they have to do is slap a sticker on it, charge more than the original grading company and sell it for more. I have more respect for SGS than CAC! >>
In addition, CAC doesn't get involved with the guarantee aspect of the coin (covering the grade and authenticity), that's also the responsibility of the grading service. For CAC it becomes a win, win, situation for them, very little effort on their part and all the real work is done by the grading service. The star designation that NGC uses or something similar but maybe not as stringent, would be the best way to identify PQ coins. PCGS could also use a star designation for "PQ" coins. IMHO, the designation for "PQ" on a coin has to come from the grading service themselves......eliminating a conflict of interest we currently see with CAC stickered coins. In addition, this would eliminate the added cost of the CAC sticker. If I trust a grading service enough to grade my coins to begin with, then they should be the one slapping a "PQ" sticker on the slab if it deserves one.
They would be wise to read these comments with an eye towards fixing perceived problems, but they didn't listen when they got 3 months of free pre-rollout feedback here, so why would they now? They're not that kind of folks. Besides, the problems are inherent in the concept itself, and aren't amenable to fixing. Only now are the little, specific things, like this stickered Buffalo, becoming apparent additional problems. Not looking good.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
CAC came on the scene like they were God, and your coin could only get through the perly gates with their approval. Like typical egotists, they will fade away quickly.
<< <i>I had an email conversation with John Albanese regarding this and other issues. Here is his response regarding this coin:
this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64
With regard to the 'solid for the grade' vs 'PQ' issue, I reiterate John's stance that because coins in TPG holders can be all over the place quality-wise it's his belief that solid for the grade means PQ these days. He is going to add a link to the website to discuss this issue - but the bottom line is that he is stickering solid for the grade coins as being PQ to the general sight unseen quality that's out there. >>
If the market was able to determine the value of the coin, then one must wonder why we need stickers.
What a bunch a drama!! Last time I checked the govt didn't require anyone to purchase slabbed coins with stickers. I still think we all have freedom of choice. Some people need to get a life!!
<< <i>I had an email conversation with John Albanese regarding this and other issues. Here is his response regarding this coin:
this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64
With regard to the 'solid for the grade' vs 'PQ' issue, I reiterate John's stance that because coins in TPG holders can be all over the place quality-wise it's his belief that solid for the grade means PQ these days. He is going to add a link to the website to discuss this issue - but the bottom line is that he is stickering solid for the grade coins as being PQ to the general sight unseen quality that's out there. >>
If the market was able to determine the value of the coin, then one must wonder why we need stickers. >>
<< <i>John's stance that because coins in TPG holders can be all over the place quality-wise it's his belief that solid for the grade means PQ these days. >>
What's sad about this statement IMO is it's actually true. It's true because when a coin is solid for the grade the dealers hype it as PQ for extra cash. So, all this about changing what has been going on, now is just going to continue with another marketer saying solid for the grade is PQ. Hahahah
I guess once again that depends on what the definition of "Is" IS!!!! Oh yeah....... Heh heh
BTW, This is all good for the hobby and collectors, it is because, well, they said so.
Please... Save The Stories, Just Answer My Questions, And Tell Me How Much!!!!!
<< <i>I had an email conversation with John Albanese regarding this and other issues. Here is his response regarding this coin:
this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64
With regard to the 'solid for the grade' vs 'PQ' issue, I reiterate John's stance that because coins in TPG holders can be all over the place quality-wise it's his belief that solid for the grade means PQ these days. He is going to add a link to the website to discuss this issue - but the bottom line is that he is stickering solid for the grade coins as being PQ to the general sight unseen quality that's out there. >>
If the market was able to determine the value of the coin, then one must wonder why we need stickers. >>
bingo!!!
it's like, which came 1st? the sticker or the market???
I humbly comment-RYK, worthy of a PHD in Marketing for a common sense "competitor shrinkage" solution. EagleEye, worthy of a PHD in Analysis for an outstanding evaluation. As to the coin, it is worth the money to somebody,regardless of our individual opinions. I am certain that this will not be the only debated piece that will have a CAC sticker, and this is exactly why the free market works. Repetition of mistakes=disappearance from the Market. CORRECTION of mistakes,(whether real, or perceived by the buying public)= continuity. If I am interpreting TDN commentary correctly, it appears that the wonderful thread created by Shamika has not fallen in silence in the "In Box" at CAC. Thus, the Market is working, and Action is contemplated. A PHD to Shamika in Capitalism, for vigilance. Lastly, and without malice, only a BA to TDN, because your point could have been made much better with a little bit of thought,and less "loyalty perception" in the language. I would have said a BS instead of BA for TDN, but then I am certain my intention would have been misinterpreted,and that I don't want, because regardless of the choice of language, he raised a VERY interesting debate point. Lastly, pharmer, you want to meet in the school yard after lunch and settle this?(read: no higher education degree awarded). Regards and Respectfully, John Curlis
Given the apparent conflict of interest in awarding stickers, it could be that the sticker actually devalues the coin. To be sure, one will pause imho before purchasing a stickered slab.
"Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world." PBShelley
Thank you pharmer, for "reading" my comments, and more importantly, validating my point with an expected level of response. However, I do think you may have missed the part at the end that stated "Regards and Respectfully....". Regards and Respectfully, John Curlis
goose3, I am certain that the intent of the commentary is clear, and regret that it could be misinterpeted as a call to arms. It was actually in follow thru to the "feats of strength' comment, thus my comment in parentheses. I humbly ask forgiveness. Regards and Respectfully, John Curlis
Comments
K S
ARGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
K S
-Paul
K S
<< <i>
<< <i>At the Baltimore Show, the only ones I saw using the sticker were Legend, their case was
filled with stickered PCGS coins. >>
Did they have any raw slabs? If so, how did they look? I would be suspicious of any raw slabs that any dealer who specializes in CAC stickered slabs might have in his case. >>
I'm sure they did have raw slabs. However, I thought the sticker would be self-justification for higher prices, so I quickly moved on.
Free Trial
Yes. Parsing is the phrase made famous by the guy in goose's post. And there is another master of it holding forth in that thread ATS.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>I would be suspicious of any raw slabs that any dealer who specializes in CAC stickered slabs might have in his case. >>
I agree 100% with that statement. I would also be weary though of a case with all stickered coins.
-Paul
Now, you have to be careful because there are "raw slabs" as well
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>Now, you have to be careful because there are "raw slabs" as well
gotta admit, once in a while, even botchedupman comes up w/ a good 1!
touche!
K S
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>Not really. His use of the term "raw", in place of "those without a green piece of sticky plastic", was unfortunate, but not trend-inducing, except for the gullible. >>
yeah, but "the botch" has a special place in my heart.
K S
Not much reason in this thread other than what Rick Snow said.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>I had an email conversation with John Albanese regarding this and other issues. Here is his response regarding this coin:
this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64 >>
So, Albanese and CAC are market grading?
<< <i>I don't care an iota about the CAC sticker, but I am curious why some of you are eager to rip it with the exception of pharmer, he'd try to stink up a Sunday buffet if you let him in. We all know where he comes from. So what upsets you all so much about this concept? I don't see anyone ripping Lawrence for his star rating system or other dealers that put PQ or some other designation in their description. Come on fess up what really tightens up your backside so completely when this subject comes up.
Not much reason in this thread other than what Rick Snow said. >>
what does David Lawrence charge for his star rating out of sheer curiousity?
<< <i>Hi Angry Mike. Rather than us bowing to your demands, you tell us what specifically you disagree with in this thread. It's all yours, Angry Mike.
C'mon Mike, you can do it. The floor is yours. Let's hear your grievances, one by one.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>
<< <i>Hi Angry Mike. Rather than us bowing to your demands, you tell us what specifically you disagree with in this thread. It's all yours, Angry Mike.
C'mon Mike, you can do it. The floor is yours. Let's hear your grievances, one by one. >>
will the feats of strength be next Pharmer?
<< <i>I don't care an iota about the CAC sticker, but I am curious why some of you are eager to rip it ... So what upsets you all so much about this concept? I don't see anyone ripping Lawrence for his star rating system or other dealers that put PQ or some other designation in their description. >>
hey irishmike, on the contrary, i think there is plenty of (justified) ripping on the idiocy of calling every coin in inventory "pq". take a look at steve estes inventory, or gus tiso. laughable! EVERY coin is "pq", whatever the he11 that means!
as for dlrc, they'v gotten their butts busted numerous times, again for the same crap, where EVERY coin is at least a "4 star" or "5 star". but go to sell your coins to dlrc, & all of a sudden, they are only "2 star" coins.
why does the cac idea suck? partly because it's run by rich-kid bozos, but mostly becuase it's flat out STUPID.
as is "pq"
as is "5 stars"
i'd have a he11uva lot of respect for a sticker applied by a consortium OF COLLECTORS.
ps: some rich people are outstanding collectors, not a rip on them.
K S
<< <i>Hi Angry Mike. Rather than us bowing to your demands, you tell us what specifically you disagree with in this thread. It's all yours, Angry Mike.
C'mon, Mike. Tell us what you disagree with in this thread, rather than everyone explaining themselves to you.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
Happy Festivus!
Buffalo Nickel Digital Album
Toned Buffalo Date SetDigital Album
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
The promoters of this arrangement have tried to justify it by pointing to a "bifurcated market" in which only they can distinguish between PQ coins and dogs, thus only their coins should be worth a premium, which they fully intend to charge when they sell you one of their stickers, er, coins.
And of course, the collector pays the freight, in every case.
This would be like having the SEC issue stock, act as their own broker and act as the policeman for every other stock issue as well. How can this ever be good for collectors?
I knew it would happen.
The promoters of this arrangement have tried to justify it by pointing to a "bifurcated market" in which only they can distinguish between PQ coins and dogs, thus only their coins should be worth a premium, which they fully intend to charge when they sell you one of their stickers, er, coins.
And of course, the collector pays the freight, in every case.
This would be like having the SEC issue stock, act as their own broker and act as the policeman for every other stock issue as well. How can this ever be good for collectors?
That's the best way I've ever heard it put. You're right on the money jmski, thank you for posting!
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Edited for grammar.
<< <i>
<< <i>"this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64"
So it's the price it brought that determines it's stickerability? That's a new blush. >>
Absent any other info [pics are not a good determination of quality of a mid grade unc coin], wouldn't you agree that price realized in auction is a good indication of how the coin looks in hand? >>
For the benefit of the responders to Karl's thread.
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i>I am not going to judge whether or not the grade is accurate or the coin is PQ, but if I were PCGS, I would buy the coin, take it off the market, and make a big show of doing so. A shot across the bow for the CAC. >>
I haven't heard anything quite so devious in quite a while. Good work!
About this comment:
Ok, Mike, here's what makes this unacceptable to collectors. A conflict of interest is being created by having the same group who is grading the already-graded coins act as market-makers for the very same coins they happen be grading.
It is not conflict of interest. The sticker identifies coins that the counsortium will buy at their bid. They have not gotten to the point of revealing their bids - they are all too busy buying coins and stocking them away for the release of their pricing structure. In any event, they are not a grading service at this point, and should not be looked upon as one (IMO). They are a market-making scheme which hopes to make a market based on the upper tier of the grade rather than the lower tier.
I agree that any dealer who is "Going CAC" has to be all in. You cannot list an inventory that is half stickered, or at least I don't think you can - they'll discover this soon.
<< <i>
<< <i>The CAC sticker is clearly a racket, promoted by the same people selling coins. Too much conflict of interest. >>
Worse than that, it is a way of starting a grading company on the cheap where most of the work has been done, grading, authentication, encapsulation, branding etc.., all they have to do is slap a sticker on it, charge more than the original grading company and sell it for more. I have more respect for SGS than CAC! >>
In addition, CAC doesn't get involved with the guarantee aspect of the coin (covering the grade and authenticity), that's also the responsibility of the grading service. For CAC it becomes a win, win, situation for them, very little effort on their part and all the real work is done by the grading service. The star designation that NGC uses or something similar but maybe not as stringent, would be the best way to identify PQ coins. PCGS could also use a star designation for "PQ" coins. IMHO, the designation for "PQ" on a coin has to come from the grading service themselves......eliminating a conflict of interest we currently see with CAC stickered coins. In addition, this would eliminate the added cost of the CAC sticker. If I trust a grading service enough to grade my coins to begin with, then they should be the one slapping a "PQ" sticker on the slab if it deserves one.
Connor Numismatics Website
Russ, NCNE
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
<< <i> market-making scheme >>
I'd agree with that.
<< <i>
<< <i> market-making scheme >>
I'd agree with that. >>
Greed Gone Wild
<< <i>I had an email conversation with John Albanese regarding this and other issues. Here is his response regarding this coin:
this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64
With regard to the 'solid for the grade' vs 'PQ' issue, I reiterate John's stance that because coins in TPG holders can be all over the place quality-wise it's his belief that solid for the grade means PQ these days. He is going to add a link to the website to discuss this issue - but the bottom line is that he is stickering solid for the grade coins as being PQ to the general sight unseen quality that's out there. >>
If the market was able to determine the value of the coin, then one must wonder why we need stickers.
<< <i>
<< <i>I had an email conversation with John Albanese regarding this and other issues. Here is his response regarding this coin:
this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64
With regard to the 'solid for the grade' vs 'PQ' issue, I reiterate John's stance that because coins in TPG holders can be all over the place quality-wise it's his belief that solid for the grade means PQ these days. He is going to add a link to the website to discuss this issue - but the bottom line is that he is stickering solid for the grade coins as being PQ to the general sight unseen quality that's out there. >>
If the market was able to determine the value of the coin, then one must wonder why we need stickers. >>
because we are sheep!
<< <i>John's stance that because coins in TPG holders can be all over the place quality-wise it's his belief that solid for the grade means PQ these days. >>
What's sad about this statement IMO is it's actually true. It's true because when a coin is solid for the grade the dealers hype it as PQ for extra cash.
So, all this about changing what has been going on, now is just going to continue with another marketer saying solid for the grade is PQ. Hahahah
I guess once again that depends on what the definition of "Is" IS!!!! Oh yeah....... Heh heh
BTW, This is all good for the hobby and collectors, it is because, well, they said so.
<< <i>
<< <i>I had an email conversation with John Albanese regarding this and other issues. Here is his response regarding this coin:
this coin brought 5x ms63 bid in 2005 and brought over double bid for an ms64 !!, clearly the market demonstrated that this coin was indeed a pq ms64
With regard to the 'solid for the grade' vs 'PQ' issue, I reiterate John's stance that because coins in TPG holders can be all over the place quality-wise it's his belief that solid for the grade means PQ these days. He is going to add a link to the website to discuss this issue - but the bottom line is that he is stickering solid for the grade coins as being PQ to the general sight unseen quality that's out there. >>
If the market was able to determine the value of the coin, then one must wonder why we need stickers. >>
bingo!!!
it's like, which came 1st? the sticker or the market???
sheesh.
K S
What an odd little rant. Specifically what have I said you didn't like?
Apropos of the coin posse/aka caca: "The longer he spoke of his honor, the tighter I held to my purse."
also, are you challenging him to a fight?..........just to be clear.