GoldFinger1969

Current interview with JA implies they are grading more along technical than market grading.  We'll see...

Anybody read the interview with JA and Maurice Rosen from 2009 ?  I bumped up the thread so it's on the 1st Page of US COINS since I couldn't link to it for some reason (got a weird error message).

I thought this exchange was interesting:

MR: Do you have any desire to one day start your own coin grading service?

JA: I really don’t, and even if I did, as I mentioned earlier, if a “C” coin came in it would have to be identified as being in its full numerical grade, not a point lower. I think the present services have established a nice baseline. Let’s remember also that most of the rare coins in existence have already been graded, so what would be the point? There would just be a lot of wasted plastic as people crack coins out of their holders. It would be very confusing. PCGS and NGC are already embedded in the market. Introducing CAC is confusing enough.

Any interviews with JA are interesting, might want to Google his name and check them out.  He has interesting comments on pricing, trends, etc.  Even when dated, they fill in gaps in history.  I don't see too many other people talking about popular coin prices.

BUMP:  The OP interview on Page 1 is relevant for CACG discussion.  I couldn't link to this thread for some reason, maybe because it was created so long ago.

On 12/27/2023 at 1:29 PM, Coinbuf said:

That would be correct under technical grading, however, it is less true under the current market grading that the TPG's use.    Under market grading the TPG's will grade on a curve (so to speak) and will/have given coins from years or mints that are known for weak strike issues grades that are higher than they should have received under technical grading.    

That's interesting....I always thought the "grading on the curve" aspect had to do with OTHER FACTORS making up for the weak strike and adding points, if not getting you back to 70 or 69 or whatever.

For instance....full/excellent luster....other notoriously "mushy" areas stronger...overall eye appeal...etc.

On 12/27/2023 at 4:14 PM, BillJones said:

I am scheduled to give a counterfeit detection seminar at the 2024 FUN show. It will be at 11:45 AM on Thursday, January 4.The emphasis will be on how to spot counterfeit coins in counterfeit slabs on-line. There will be handout so that you can use my tips on your computer, cell phone and iPad at home and at the shows.  I hope to meet you there!  

Should be fantastic, wish I was going. 

Any chance it will be recorded and available for viewing at a later date ?

On 12/27/2023 at 4:09 PM, mlovmo said:

The seller then pulls the listing and sells the coin according to the agreed terms.  

Or....has multiple items in inventory and sells one of them while keeping the listing for YEARS at a high price....unless someone is dumb enough to buy it for 200% over FMV. 

On 12/27/2023 at 4:09 PM, mlovmo said:

This also happens with "higher value, LEGIT coins," too. For example, a seller will list at eBay a coin that normally sells for, say, $2,500~$3,000 in the North American market/eBay for $7,000 BIN.

Yeah, see it all the time especially with a lower-priced "hot" item like the National Park Foundation Saint-Gaudens commemoratives which are nice and much cheaper than buying a 1 ounce Saint.  Also see it on the 5-ounce silvers for the Moon landing, American National Parks, etc.

I see stuff that is over the last sale on Ebay by 100-200% and it is still being advertised YEARS later.  I mean, if the person has others for sale and people are finding him/her then maybe that item listed on Ebay is there just for show.  But if that's the one he REALLY wants to sell, I don't get it -- unless they are waiting for The One Dumb Buyer.  

On 12/27/2023 at 4:09 PM, mlovmo said:

The seller does NOT expect anyone to buy it via eBay, of course.  EBay in this sense is only an ADVERTISING PLATFORM for this coin. How?  Well, many dealers' eBay handles are exactly the same as the name of their coin business or online name they use elsewhere.

I suspected as much....a few years ago I spend a bit over $500 on a really nice currency bill.  Seller had me send payment to his shop.  They probably saved me or him $100 (~20% ?) in fees, huh ?

I wonder how prevalent this is with eBay.  I know they have rules against it but not sure how you can enforce it (remove the seller ?).  Have to check an upcoming sell-side report and see if this "leakage" is a growing concern.

Sandon, good stuff....when I get home I will be taking out my same ANA edition and FMTM to go over all these fine details. 

We call these coins "weakly struck" or "weak strikes"....but in reality....they appear to be poorly-basined dies, which is a longer phrase, more cumbersome, though it might be more accurate.

Before these threads and reading FMTM, I thought weak strike literally meant that the die was poorly designed or the mechanical press was off.  The actual strike isn't the problem -- it's the die. 

On 12/26/2023 at 4:45 PM, VKurtB said:

I also have one fund that has gained every day that I’ve owned it. I bought 100 shares last week. Swiss Helvetia CF Fund. 

I used to call on them when I was on the sell-side.  Cheap SOBs...took our research, and never paid us.  Or me, at least. 

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

The polished die field would only last a few thousand coins before it became dulled by die wear. On p.56, Morgan Dollar dies struck anywhere from 100,000 to 200,000 coins.

Wow, only a few thousand.  Not sure how long other large silver coins saw their dies last or other large gold coins but that does seem very low.

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

Each mint basined the individual dies and apparently the basin radii varied slightly from mint to mint over the years.

Interesting, didn't know that or forgot it from my 1st reading of FMTM. 

We didn't have fine measuring tools back then, I could see how this could be a wide discrepancy affecting strike.  Philly made all the dies, but then if the basining was off, you either had a great die (SanFran) or crappy one (NO).

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

I can only figure the graders use overriding factors to determine if a lack of detail on an MS specimen is due to a weak strike and not something else.

Again...if the die is simply created wrongly and the strike stinks, the coin -- even if as good as it can be coming off the press -- would NOT get an MS-70 rating if otherwise perfect, because the defect (basining or whatever) prevented the finished coin from looking as good as others, right ?

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

So to @GoldFinger1969, I think the answer to your question is due to many factors : the making of the dies, the polishing of the dies, the overuse of the dies, the pressure of the presses, the wearing of master hubs, and the differences at each individual mint.

Thanks Power  ....and to everyone else, too.  I really learned alot in this thread.  This is the NGC Forums at their finest. 

On 12/23/2023 at 11:55 AM, Henri Charriere said:

If true, i.e., the use of subpar materials, that doesn't bode well for an upstart.  At the very least, I would expect a state-of-the-art  museum-quality mausoleum with chip technology to insure the integrity of the product in repose has not been compromised.

Yeah, aren't security chips now standard on some of the pricier valuations of coins or tiered grading services ?  I would have thought CACG would have had that from Day 1.

Maybe nobody really wants it in their holders ?

On 12/19/2023 at 9:57 AM, zadok said:

 in some instances i have purchased certified coins in grades ms64 n ms65 non-stickered n broken the coins out n resubmitted to the other tpg in hopes of getting the coins graded one grade lower n then submitted to CAC if i thought the coin warranted a sticker, the monetary advantage outweighs the costs involved.

Hey....you're not the guy who asked for and received a LOWER grade for a 1927-D Saint so it could get a CAC sticker, are you ? 

On 12/26/2023 at 10:00 PM, Henri Charriere said:

While I can fully appreciate the point you are trying to make, comparing an MS-67 certified by one TPGS with an MS-62 certified by another, is inherently unfair.  I am afraid, while you may be correct, those unacquainted with the series cannot be expected to proceed solely on the strength of the evidence, or lack thereof, presented. Any presence of wear can be ruled out and who graded what when is irrelevant, but to illustrate your point effectively, the viewer requires silver dollars minted at two different locations at, or very close, to the same grade and year.

In this case....with 5 grade points between them...and the curls and feathers so noticeable....it's a good illustration of the striking issue, regardless of whether or not we quibble with the grade each coin got from different TPGs. 

But I do see your point.

On 12/26/2023 at 9:12 PM, Sandon said:

   So that readers can see what this topic refers to, here are photos of (1) an 1881-S Morgan dollar graded MS 67 by PCGS that is fully struck, as is typical for most early "S" mint Morgan dollars and (2) an 1892-O Morgan dollar graded MS 62 by NGC with weakness at the centers, as is frequently seen on "O" mint issues of the early to mid 1890s:

Can definitely see the difference in the curls above the ear and the breast feathers on the eagle.  Two of the best/easiest "tells" on coins that I can recall. 

Wow...CACG would call a scratch a Details coin ?  That's harsh.

On 12/25/2023 at 11:11 PM, EagleRJO said:

Not very likely unless there is something specific you are thinking the TPGs might do to give the appearance of being wiped or cleaned.

If the surface is soft (i.e., gold) and it comes out of a velvet pouch or something "rougher"....maybe the coin's surface could look "cleaned" ?

On 12/26/2023 at 12:10 PM, RWB said:

This is explained in From Mint to Mint. After reading the section, let me know if there are further questions. (Detailed toggle press patent drawings are available in Journal of Numismatic Research (JNR) issue #1.)

Will do ...it's at home, and I'm making the rounds with F&F. 

On 12/26/2023 at 9:58 AM, J P M said:

There may have been a process of lowering the force of the strike on purpose as the die got older to help get more life out of it. If you look at how many VAM's are out there you can see they had an issue with dies breaking on every year. So, most of the the first strikes coins will always look good. Then as time passes the later strikes even if they did not change the force would still be a weaker strike just from usage.   

They struck so many it would have been very expensive and added to the costs to replace them at normal intervals I guess.

On 12/18/2023 at 5:54 PM, Coinbuf said:

I don't think it has anything to do with the CAC startup, just coincidence.   I think the covid boom is starting to fade, not gone but it has lessened and is putting some pressure on pricing in some areas where some buyers may have "paid up" and are now having a tough time finding a buyer.

I would agree with this, CB. 

Have any of you checked out this price, sticker, and grading matrix by CAC ?  Not sure if they always had this sans the grading component but it's pretty useful.  Though I question the prices at certain points -- like that for a 1908 No Motto Saint-Gaudens MS-67...$16,200 for the 27 stickered (none GRADED that high by CACG).  MS-67's can be had for ~ 5,500 (NGC) and ~ $6,500 (PCGS) and if the MS-68's are ~ $25,000 that price for the 67 CACG or sticker seems to be implying very good chance of an upgrade to 68 which the passage of time would seem to say otherwise.

On 12/17/2023 at 11:28 PM, VKurtB said:

So far, the actual plastic slab at CACG is a piece of junk, relative to PCGS or NGC. They’ll need to improve it, and not just a little. The service is fine. The product is not. 

Is it tamper-resistant and as protective as the PCGS and NGC holders ?

Finishing up the 4th (!) Edition of David Bowers Whitman Red Book on Morgans....I'm struck (figuratively not literally !!  ) by the constant repetition of "weak strike...lack of hair detail above Liberty's ear....soft breast feathers on eagle."

This is pretty much a constant with all the Morgan's from 1878 thru 1904.  Not sure about 1921 when the series resumed.

Was this an issue of simply not having the tools to make quality dies during this time period ?  An issue of lack of metallurgy skills ? Or was it just particular to the folks who made the Morgan dies ?  I'll assume it had nothing to do with the striking equipment based on RWB's past statements on that equipment.

It's been a while since I read the Double Eagle Red Book book which covers the Liberty Head DEs, but maybe similar problems cropped up there as they overlapped on the time period.  I know it wasn't present on all the years/mintmarks of the Saint series which began in 1907.

Any Morgan experts familiar with the "weak strike" issue ?  Common to all coins before the early-1900's, large coins only, or just Morgan's ?

All coins raw ?

Any particularly notable coins in popularly-collected series:  Saints, Liberty Head DEs, Morgan's, Franklin Halfs, or Lincolns ?

On 12/23/2023 at 11:38 AM, VKurtB said:

Do my dividend yields mean nothing? At my age, I do favor dividend paying stocks in the account I manage personally. With a week to go, it LOOKS LIKE my best performing stock will be Truist Bank. Great dividend. 

I plugged that stock and other dividend-paying bank stocks a few months ago on some other forums.  Sometimes a high dividend can signify trouble but in TFC's case the stock price got cut in half and a 4% yield became 8%. 

I'd love to have a Financial Markets or Stock Market Thread where I can post thoughts and actual sell-side research.  But we can't attach PDFs here even though I've requested it over the years.

Maybe if some of you also bang the doors. 

On 12/25/2023 at 7:40 PM, J P M said:

We had a post a while back where someone had a 2021 morgan they submitted it as a new coin hoping for a MS70.. The coin came back as cleaned. It was said to have been wiped at the mint before receiving the coin.

Maybe the submitter mishandled it ?  Or it could have been a gross error on the part of the TPG, though I have never heard of this happening before....brand new coin from the Mint being considered UNC DETAILS.