Dang! Blown out of the Water!
braddick
Posts: 24,811 ✭✭✭✭✭
I thought I was placing a nuclear snipe bid on this beauty but a couple of other bidders wanted it more than me!
I was surprised, to say the least, at the action within the last few seconds:
CAC Gold FRANLKIN
I was surprised, to say the least, at the action within the last few seconds:
CAC Gold FRANLKIN
peacockcoins
0
Comments
Steve
For cameo proofs, does the + mean
1) it just misses a 66 instead of a 65?
2) it just missses a dcam instead of a can?
3) it just misses both 1 & 2?
For the gold bean does it mean
1) it should have been graded a 66 instead of a 65?
2) it should have been graded a dcam instead of a cam?
3) both 1 & 2?
The pics on the ebay auction leave much to be desired - they are so bad, I can't even guess whether it deserves dcam status.
But based on the three strong bidders, they must feel it has a shot at dcam otherwise their bids don't seem logical to me.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
type2,CCHunter.
What's wrong with this PF66 CAC 1955 Franklin for a BIN of $185? Link here
edited to fix typo
So which is worth more - a 65+ Gold CAC or a 66 unstickered?
<< <i>Interesting comment: "IT HAS BEEN AWARDED THE GOLD STICKER BY CAC! WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT CAC HAS APPROVED THIS COIN AS A PROOF 66 CAMEO. "
So which is worth more - a 65+ Gold CAC or a 66 unstickered? >>
Answered by the post above yours.
<< <i>it actually looks like a shill bid was placed to me, winner has 1 feedback score and only bid on this item. Just my 2 cents, I bet this item resurfaces soon back on the bay >>
That was my first thought as well.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
Bidder Information
Bidder: 5***v( 1 )
Feedback: 100%Positive
Item description: Item Title: 1955 FRANKLIN HALF DOLLAR PCGS PROOF 65+ CAMEO CAC GOLD STICKER!
Bids on this item: 3
30-Day Summary
Total bids: 3
Items bid on: 1
Bid activity (%) with this seller: 100%
Bid retractions: 0
Bid retractions (6 months): 0
BTW it's not worth that much even with the gold and the + IMO.
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
What would the result of that be?.. .
Hi All,
is my memory going or does/did gold denote an undergraded coin in the opinions of the sticker placers? That's a little more than agreeing fully, no? And that would be "undergraded" to whose standards? If W thinks X is essentially wrong say, 2/3 of the time, then why should I place an added premium for X getting it "right" only 1/3 the time? The other 1/3 that get a premium (larger it seems), for getting it "not right enough" one can see, but if X and W are using just a few criterion differently to arrive at these numbers then...what are they worth to each other in relation (I ONLY mean in terms of interaction with each other) as in this scenario? It's like that old Jackson 5 song "It's easy as A,B,C..."
Eric
<< <i>Kind of makes me wonder what the + means. (and the CAC gold bean for that matter).
For cameo proofs, does the + mean
1) it just misses a 66 instead of a 65?
2) it just missses a dcam instead of a can?
3) it just misses both 1 & 2?
For the gold bean does it mean
1) it should have been graded a 66 instead of a 65?
2) it should have been graded a dcam instead of a cam?
3) both 1 & 2?
>>
If I were a businessman in some other arena, I'd like l these variations on products or items I sell very much!
Eric
I posted a similar thread ( before I read this one) regarding this exact same auction trying to determine if CAC meant that much of a premium over PCGS price guide. My original thread title used the words "gold bean" and it was pulled. I reposted using "CAC sticker" instead. Not only was it pulled, I was banned from the site. I immediately emailed PCGS (and later called) and was informed that I was "suspected" of being a previously banned poster.
Obviously, my "posting privileges" have been restored after "confirmation of my PCGS membership" but only until they can "check my IP address to confirm that I'm not the previously banned poster".
Needless to say, I'm pretty pissed about this whole situation, as I've had nothing but glowing praise for PCGS and had never mentioned CAC until this recent post which was made simply to "learn" about the value of CAC stickers.
Now for my question: Was there a previous poster who slammed PCGS and/or CAC? And wouldn't it be better to do your "investigation" of IP addresses because of "suspicions" before banning someone?
Sincerely,
ClinkinKY