zadok

magna res...

deflection again....subject wasnt bout disclosure on coins being sold, subject bout making public from whom bought n whom sold to n prices paid/realized n privy info on where hoards came from....no legal r ethical issues involved...

...several observations n comments, try to be succinct...no obligations period, legal or otherwise...the "story" has nothing to do with the coin(s) themselves, its just cream on top, nice to have...certainly not crucial in any sense of the word...not divulging sources has nothing to do with anyone's professionalism, its discretionary pure n simple...has nothing to do with trade, profits, finances, mark-ups etc...its simply a choice, sometimes entwined with other considerations such as privacy or confidentiality...not everyone needs to know where everything comes from, some items or discoveries r transacted in strict non-disclosure terms...i have bought items where the transaction was contingent on not revealing the source, either honor the terms or not buy...sure pedigrees on coins r great, own a few such coins myself, not crucial, just cream....pedigrees from public auctions just that public info, pedigrees from private sales not public if so desired...i fully support the historical n research aspect of numismatics, makes it more relevant n interesting, spent a few thousand hours at the national archives myself doing research, have published articles on coins as well, but never believed anyone has an obligation to provide any more info on their coins or discoveries than they wanted to...e.g. one individual on this forum constantly bemoans that a certain historical dealer destroyed all his records rather than make them public, i knew this dealer n actually had a discussion on same subject when i requested some historical info on certain coins, some i was provided some not...in this situation the privacy of various sellers n buyers n other financial considerations far outweighed any nice historical aspects of the records, i fully support that decision...rwb's book has some hoard info, interesting, personally i prefer tripp's research on certain pedigrees, bower's book has even more hoard info....im personally aware of several mini-hoards, one in ur collecting wheelhouse, but i have no obligations to reveal that info to anyone, the owner's privacy n the confidentiality we share far more important than any revelations on making the info public...as u r personally aware, i am not opposed to sharing of information if its pertinent to providing accuracy i.e. the previous info i shared with u on a certain issue, which was private n which u honored...i have likewise provided some personal insight to qa on mini-hoard info on his beloved roosters, nothing earthshaking but info i preferred it directed to him n not on the open forum...personal choice, right or wrong....so while i support ur enthusiasm for the rest of the numismatic story i take exception to the position that numismatists r obligated to divulge their source info if they choose not to....none of this has anything to do with the actual coins that we collect, they dont know where they came from...not as succinct as i wished...

...no clue bout anything u mentioned, none of it has anything to do with my comment, ur ref to misrepresentations, errors etc totally irrelevant to my comment....wasnt even directed at any of ur episodes...my statement in response to goldfinger thinking numismatists et al have an obligation to provide details on the sources of material they find, locate, discover, sell etc....

i guess bout the same as two oxen turning a mill then...

what was ur carbon foot print?....

thats cool, at first i thought it mite be hoghead himself pre-beard, but realized it is good ole dan'l boone himself, the guenther brothers founded blue grass canning co. circa 1895....great local history item...

...where does it say that numismatists, or anyone else, has an obligation to give out any details to anybody???...

in hind site perhaps using X% to differentiate between best, better, good was a bit confusing, tiers a,b,c serves the same purpose to illustrate the point being made....after all tiers a,b,c represent a certain %age of the coins in that date n grade even if that %age is adjusted after each coin evaluated...my narrative was generally based on a conversation i had with ja years ago when he then used the word % to clarify a question i had asked...im sure their metrics have had some revisions n terminology changes since then.....

no one ever said that an ngc 65 n an pcgs 65 r the same or equal....i seriously doubt the dealer with a ngc 65 non-cac is going sell his coin for 64 money...the 65 with cac prob will bring 65+ money....in this instance the cac coin prob does appear to be the superior coin, could just as easy be the other way around...not all 65 coins r equal, hence the A,B,C tiers, whether we agree or not....

collectors normally buy something cause they like it, want it, need it or combination of all three...prob decide based on their mind, heart n ego...nothing wrong with any of those reasons...striving for the best n truly enjoying the journey, paradise...being obsessed by it, not so much...buying a coin just because of the label, a journey without a lasting satisfaction...buying a coin thats the finest, satisfaction u can live with until u dont want it or need it anymore...the good old days, pre-certification, pure collecting just for the satisfaction...those days r gone forever n now u try to find that satisfaction with a certification measuring stick, not as much fun but it is what it is....

absolutely...totally irrelevant n unimportant to any discussions here....

99% of the readers on this or any other forum still dont fully understand just what a cac green bean signifies on a slab...it does not add nor subtract from the grade on the slab, it has no influence on the grade on the slab, it almost certainly adds to the perception that that particular coin could possibly be a higher grade if not now in the future but that is not the intent of the bean...it simply put, indicates that that particular coin in that date n in that grade is in the top X% of all coins in that date n that grade that has been submitted to cac for evaluation, nothing more...obviously eye appeal, lustre, original color, lack of distracting marks etc enter into the formula (all subjective)...it does not mean e.g. that a '92-s morgan in xf45 is competing against a '93-s morgan in xf45, it means a '92-s morgan in xf45 is competing against all other '92-s morgans in xf45 that have been submitted...obviously there has to be a sliding scale because all '92-s morgans have not been submitted yet, but at the time the coin was evaluated it was in the top X% of those submitted up until that time...thats all that it means...all the rest is people's interpretation of what they believe it means, mostly incorrect assumptions...gold beans would be another discussion.....

blue sometimes gray......no one really cares bout what u did for a living or what i did either....totally irrelevant to op's orig inquiry....i just dont have a compulsion to think im obligated to make negative condescending comments on everything i hear or read that i take exception to, especially when i dont know anything bout the person im referencing n in this case what his coin collection mite consist of, for all i know his 2k coins mite be worth multiples of ur 100k collection or mine as well...the examples i gave u r actual facts, ur comments were scenario based....all in all its a moot issue the op received the answer to his question n thats all he asked for in the first place, not an opinion on the quality of his coins...

definitely an unreasonable expectation in numismatics....

still assuming n still condescending but to each his own as far as opinions go....true 2k coins could cost $50k or more to certify, n most wouldnt go there but there r exceptions, as for having auction houses do the certifying at reduced fees thats only viable if one is going to sell ones collection....i chose to certify portions of my collection solely for reasons other than resale considerations, there is more to collecting than monetary considerations, sometimes its just pure ego, wanting to verify on a universal yardstick that one has the finest collection in the world for instance n sometimes it mite be just to display a certain collection in a certain manner, ive done both...n yes there r some collectors who do have complete runs of 19th century mint state coins, i have done that more than once myself n i know several others who have done the same...definitely not errors, moderns nor common coins...for example just look at one registry set of american 19th cent gold...the jlr louisiana purchase new orleans mint gold in all denominations, virtually complete in mint state...cost more to certify than most collectors collections r worth, n i am aware of several such collections...true most 2k+ coin accumulations most likely r common, modern or pocket change collections but not all....i personally could not nor would not certify all of my collection, but for varied reasons i have done so for portions of it, but not for resale considerations since i have no intentions of ever selling any of my collection...im sure qa n his rooster collection or lem n his super jefferson collection didnt consider the resale value of their collections when the decided to certify their coins, true they dont number in the 2k n their cert costs r minimal to the cost of their coins but their driving reasons to certify ill bet werent to enhance the resale value....no sense beating a dead horse, everyone has their own opinions n justifiably so....i guess if i collected 20th cent moderns n had 2k-100k coins i wouldnt consider certs either....but i certainly wouldnt assume that someone just mite want to do that...

correct the op ques was just to clarify definition of bulk submissions...vk response was very assumptive n condescending , first of all he nor any of us know anything bout the quality or scope of op collection, also simple matter for op to have already determined cost of certifying 2k coins, maybe he did maybe he didnt, prob correct that many/most collectors dont have 2k coins that warrant cost of certification, if that is a consideration of certification, maybe they just want their coins certified for any number of reasons, resale value isnt the only consideration...i for one had to make a decision back in the '80s did i want to spend the extra money to certify all or portions of my collections, personal decision, initial cost to me excess of $6k just to cert one collection...should i decide to cert all the rest would exceed 2k coins few times over, most of which would warrant the cost, again personal decision...if one has mostly modern non-rare coins cost to cert 2k coins prob prohibitive, if on other hand if collections r 19th cent mint state coins cost to cert not so prohibitive...either way no one here has the position of assumptively asserting that anyone else's collection either warrants or doesnt warrant certification....

op's ques was concerning display of oversized slabbed coins in album pages not bout grading or cross-grading....a prob encountered by others...sometimes littleton coin company n wizard coin supply has access to various size album pages but most these items r currently on back order or out of stock...some of the more sophisticated office supply stores can order custom made pages, i had a few custom pages made for slabbed oversized medallions not cheap but served my needs....

no....6.45 grams total weight 0.1867 troy oz gold = 5.807 grams so bout bit more than 1/6th oz gold

checked the chicken chicanery check engine checklist n it said fenntucky mike ate it all...

where is the chicken dinner?....

it could be the addition n removal of the outhouse but ill just go with the size of the star on the obverse....

there is true rarity n then there is condition rarity...i own both n i know which gives me the most satisfaction....the former seldom changes n the latter can change on a whiff....how many eggs should one put in one basket?....

is that also true for Second Engraver (John Reich).......

so assistant engraver equates to acting engraver?....