zadok

i would attribute asset mania to a commodity bubble n i personally dont think the current coin collecting increases in prices or numbers r indicative of a bubble nor do i view coin collecting as a commodity even though some have intrinsic gold n silver value....non-collector speculation does fit ur definition but i dont consider that to be coin collecting....the biggest threat to coin collecting is generational...in my opinion the upcoming generation doesnt collect anything....

we obviously r not seeing the US coin collecting community the same....it is clearly obvious to me that the collecting community is expanding in both numbers n scope...i dont see the increasing prices reducing the number of buyers nor preventing them from buying the coins they want....they r not moving to more affordable less desirable coins, i see them still buying the higher priced coins but just fewer at a time or more spaced out to accommodate their budgets, i for one have have not ceased buying the coins i want/need just because of price escalation, instead of buying 5-6 coins in a signature auction i only buy 3-4...in fact i have spent more this past year than in previous years, true prices r higher but there were more desirable coins available because of the higher prices...investment concerns have never been a deciding factor in my coin purchase decisions...in the collecting orbits that i navigate in the number of competitors have literally tripled in the past 3-4 years....i recently read that not only have the major auction houses total sales increased but that the number of individual buyers have also increased....i dont see this dissipating in the near future.....

10-15% n in some series as much as 30%, but i dont see morgans as benefiting that much, morgans r n have been over inflated n over promoted for many years now, virtually none r rare in any of the grades......

possibly some truth in all three ur classifications but also some incorrectness in all three....i could build a case to define myself in each n could just as easily define myself as not fitting in any of them or even fitting in all three at the same time...as before, coin collecting is not a one size fits all....truthfully, i collect coins for entirely diff reasons than any u express in ur classifications n i suspect many others do as well....coin collecting can be an investment but in n of itself is not an investment....however for some those two can go hand in hand....the real definition of a coin collector cant be generalized as such....i guess u could apply ur definitions to the actual coin collections assembled if u choose to dissect them on their own merits but not necessarily the owner who assembled them....u seem to want to differentiate the american collector from foreign collectors n their driving motivations....to most if not all american collectors, we simply dont care what or why foreign collectors collect....i for one am an american collector that collects both american n foreign coins for various reasons, foreign collectors have very little if any impact on my collections or my collecting, except the occasional competition for a specific coin when it comes on the market....my personal collecting rationale simply doesnt fit in ur classifications.....

He is/was a dealer that specialized in mint error coins, from his comments ats I get the feeling that the ANA show next week is the last.
 
I am not clear on if he was ever a formal employee or not.  Its my understanding that he was one of the original dealers that Hall contracted with to develop the PCGS brand and he has been the go to individual when PCGS needed someone to evaluate an error coin.   But the difference of employee or consultant is more semantics as his retirement is a considerable loss for PCGS in the mint error arena, I imagine that his expertise will be very difficult to replace.

copies of those spade coins will probably be on ebay by next week.....

copies of those spade coins will probably be on ebay by next week.....

What I learned is that none of the 14 I’ve seen are particularly eye grabbing. There are no truly gaudy grades in any of them. Even the Smithsonian pieces are rather “meh”.

Mr. Weitzman is now in the numismatic history books... and he had the pleasure of owning a wonderful coin for 19 years... not a bad addendum to his modest investment.

The problem is... going public doesn't only benefit the "sterling characters" you refer to.. it also informs the numismatic low-lifes (and they are out there!)  Chances are some of our erudite brethren know who Mr. or Ms. "X" is.  
As to "furtherance of knowledge"  the identity of the new owner will add little to anyone's knowledge of one of the most photographed and documented coins out there.  
If I bought it (and frankly you don't know that I didn't!), I would sure as hell keep my identity secret...for lots of reasons.   
 

I find the very thought anyone would say, No! to someone of RWB's caliber unconscionable, and quite frankly, ill-mannered, unacceptable and offensive.

I think we are in agreement, mostly at least.  Ultimately, it comes down to personal preference and the collectors attitude toward collecting.  There is no "one size fits all."
I agree with you that those who spend more money are more inclined to collect as you describe, because they are more able to afford it and the amount of the outlay motivates them to do it.
But the availability also has a lot to do with it.  You know this better than I do.  More prominent US coins in very low grades, many of which I consider "dreck" regardless that US collectors see it differently.  These coins cost four and sometimes five figures, even with problems or in "market acceptable" grades of AG-3 or G-4.
A coin like the 1796 quarter or 1796-1797 half.  These coins are scarcer than those I collect as a type, because the combined mintages are very low and much lower than my series.  It's several thousand versus several million.  But in decent circulated grades, higher grades, or even "choice", mostly not really rare most of the time.  I don't see 1794 dollars, 1796 half cents or 1802 half dimes often.  I do see most early US federal type in "high quality" (regardless of date) and often in multiple most or every time I look.
If I insisted on collecting with similar exacting quality standards or tried to enforce a uniform look, I'd hardly ever buy anything.

understand ur points n dont necessarily disagree in general....but coin collecting isnt a one size fits all thing....i was addressing the issue of scarcity n rarity more than acceptable quality...true virtually all US 20th cent coins r readily available in all grades, my comments more directed at 19th cent n 18th cent issues where certain coins r truly rare n not obtainable in certain grades...if one has enuf money one can possibly obtain an example of virtually ever coin ever issued by the US excepting coins that r unique n permanently impounded...my personal experience with collectors of 18-19th cent US coins, including myself, is there is a desire to assemble collections with some sort of uniformity, grade wise....i have assembled several sets of such coins over the past 5 decades n i always established reasonable expectation parameters for the collections before i started..."acceptable quality" if u will....examples, in my seated half dime collection i believed it possible to obtain all coins in mint state n it was....in my seated quarter collection i knew that obtaining all coins in mint state wasnt realistic, so my acceptable quality parameters were f-15 to xf-45, which was obtained but took 15 years to do so because some of those coins r not available in certain grades for years....conditional rarity....but both of those collections were uniform in appearance, the later being displayed nationally....i would agree with ur comment that most foreign collectors r not as obsessed with grading as much as US collectors r....having said that, i chose to carry over my US instincts in my foreign collections n strive only for mint state coins n almost all r certified by the tpgs, true i may not be able to complete some of these collections in mint state, the coins dont exist, so eventually i will have to expand my acceptable quality parameters or do without....
as for ur questions why dont US buyers buy from face to face dealers as opposed to auction houses?...no clear answer, i personally buy most of my coins thru the major auctions or major firms but will buy from dealers in person if the opportunity arises....i think its more of what the buyers r comfortable with n the confidence they believe the auction houses provide even if it costs them more money....

I'm at the point in my primary series where I am about to run out of coins from the TPG population data to buy.  There are five dates remaining (from a series broadly defined with 104 coins) in a quality I will accept (that is, not dreck) that I currently do not own.  However, I have not seen most of these coins and there are some real "head scratchers" out there where I have no idea how that grade was assigned.  There are also additional upgrades but that's less of a priority.
So yes, in an example like mine, it will be beneficial to attempt to acquire through private transaction because it's essentially the only option.  If I ever decide to attempt it, there is one dealer on the PCGS forum and the author/collector of the reference book I will approach as a starting point.
When I collected South Africa Union as my primary series, I also sold most of my better coins privately about 10 years ago.  However, that's because there is almost no market for these coins in the US, except at or near Krause list which is well below the value in South Africa.  It's one of the reasons I changed my focus, too much trouble to sell.

Just possibly THE BEST POST of 2021. 

incorrect use of the word bluster....but ironic n amusing considering the source.....

Ross, I could live with personal anonymity if the person so desires.   Especially if the person isn't an ultra-high net worth individual and somebody for whom security or the cost of security could be a concern.  I get it.
However, I see absolutely no harm in having a 3rd party see the coin for numismatist purposes, especially if it hasn't been seen or catalogued in decades (if ever).  Nothing wrong either with having updated pictures taken by a reputable firm like HA or NGC or PCGS or a numismatist like RWB....or them asking questions about the coin's provenance (the current party excepted).
To each his or her own, of course.  I just thought that one of the major perks of owning a rarity like the 1921 Specimen Saint probably means you get to put your own mark on owning it for a period of time.  Because chances are, it probably WON'T turn out to be a good investment.

everyone is entitled to their own boundaries n comfort zones.....distinguished, published, professional, recognized r very loose terms n can mean very diff things to diff people, n often nothing at all...entering one's inner circle on family or personal items is usually by invitation not by request...biased or pre-determined opinions can be big negatives for many persons...."expert" opinions can mean very little to many persons as well....so called "experts" r mostly self derived anyway...personally speaking, there r very few persons i would invite to view or inspect my collections...i dont view the owners decision as unbecoming nor telling in any manner.....

Sorry I cannot be of any help, I have submitted twice in the last year but as I am a collector (and those two submissions were not for resale of the coins) those costs are sunk and I did/do not care about tracking the costs.  Overall there is no single number that can be defined as the correct breakeven point as too many variables are involved.  Roger often throws out his $250 number as the baseline value for submitting, but Rodger is not a collector or dealer so that number is only relevant to him and not to anyone else.  As has been noted the only number that matters is has the value been enhanced enough to recoup the costs of the grading process if selling is the end goal.  For collectors who may have other goals besides an eventual sale the value enhancement may well be a secondary concern and thus not the most important concern.  While I don't make a habit of this I too have submitted coins with sub $50 values because selling the coin was not the primary goal.

@RWB Man was not created to live in an atmosphere devoid of life, gravity and air.  (If it were up to me, I would pull the rug out from under the Space Force and cut the space exploration budget, NASA, et al. to $0.00). 
 It is interesting but prohibitively expensive.

OP, did you miss this part of the explanation?:
 
If PCGS and NGC use different designations, and attribute world coins differently, how could they possibly include both company's coins in their registry? Can you imagine the confusion if, for example, NGC recognized varieties that PCGS did not, or vice versa. Or, if one company called a variety by one name, and the other company used a different name? Or if one company declared that a certain coin type existed, but the other company did not agree? If different standards are used - which they are - the amount of cross-referencing, footnoting, and explanations necessary would be staggering. And, that does not even take into account different standards used in grading, which, I am told, do actually exist. So, is NGC expected to change their grading standards to match their competitor, or should there be a (constantly-updated) chart that compares NGC grades to their PCGS equivalent? And, if the grades are different, which company's standards are used to rank the coins?

Blackstone is happy to make money. The Registry is a marketing tool at the end of the day. NGC does us the favor of letting us put PCGS coins in US sets and even splits out awards for those sets for NGC-only vs sets with PCGS coins included.
It is not necessarily in NGC's interest to bend over backwards more to make things more inclusive for their competitors and people who mostly support their competitor. It is not necessarily in their interest to show that they're willing to spend vast sums of money to do this. What message does this send to PCGS?
Try complaining on the PCGS boards about how they should allow NGC coins - which they don't. At all. They will probably ban you suggesting it.

u forgot tolerate.....

Specimen = Special Strike. It's not a circulation strike, but not a traditional proof strike. These coins were made high quality cameo PL, but not proofs. SP seems like a valid designation. PL6x could have also worked, but that kind of implies that all the examples are PL and some may not be.

A lot of people believe the graders know, or at least suspect, whose coins they are grading.
1) I do NOT believe that; and both major firms deny it.
2) If I DID believe it, I’d consider the whole shmeer unethical and I’d never submit coins, … EVER!
3) I can’t handle any more ethical lapses in this field/hobby. I still haven’t gotten over learning that major auction firms shill bid on their own coins in order to avoid major losses.