MikeInFL

Some fabulous coins since the last time I visited this thread!

Great coins, guys.

Really like that '53, Shane!

Very nice quarter Jon!

Great coins guys!

Here are a few NEWPs:

For the type set:

For the Dansco:

The latest addition to the Dansco 7070:

My first coin from James/Dennis. Thanks guys!

Great coins guys & nice '22, 123.

p.s. If I were in the speculation game, I'd try and find a few nice bust quarters.

But if lots of folks believe (regardless if they are "led" or not) that a coin is worth a certain amount -- isn't that the real value of that coin?

I'm not disputing a market can't be manipulated (and any one of a number of "marketing programs" can be pointed to), but if the market goes along and pays those prices -- presumably they did so of their own free will -- aren't those prices real and valued correctly?

Said another way, is there any way to disconnect the marketing effect from coin prices, given DEMAND is affected by marketing and the primary driver in a coin's price?

So in summary, popularity is demand -- and a function of the BUYERS, not "the market".

All IMHO...Mike

I don't think there's such a thing as undervalued or overvalued. The market is what it is.

Now if you're asking about future prices and what's likely to head up or down, that's another story....

Taking the risk of following IGWT's fabulous nickels, here's the latest addition to my type set:

The coin is prooflike and the color a bit more subdued until you "flash" the surfaces. It looks to me a like a die that's seen a lot of wear but was lapped/polished and the polish lines and prooflike surfaces are the result.

Thanks Mr. Feld.

The fact that many people are not going to avail themselves of CAC does not mean that CAC is not going to have any effect on Coin Collecting. It has already been noticed by many that perhaps the TPGs have tightened up their grading because of CAC. I do not have any evidence that this is the case but let us say that it is the case.

 

Who is to say that they haven't tightened too much? Now we have CAC being the sole arbiter of whether or not the TPGs are too tight or just right or a guarantee for the grade etc.Can you or anybody else state with 100% certainity that CAC is more correct or too strict or just right.

 

Then we have a situation where there has been talk of going to a 100 point grading scale. Albanese has already increased it by the A B and C.Do all the coins then graded on a 70 point scale have oe evaluated on the new 100 point scale?

 

Of course there is eventually going to have to be another layer to make sure that CAC has it right.You don't think that if CAC has a sticker denoting an upgrade that people aren't going to send their coin back to the TPG that originally certified it. What happens when the TPG refuses to upgrade it?

 

Meanwhile we still have another layer that is prone to errors watching over another Entity that is also prone to errors,

 

Using your logic -- if all grading entities are prone to errors, why do we need any of them? The answer to that is we need them because they provide value -- the TPGs with their authenticity guarantee and slab, the CAC for the potential value-add it can provide. But really, we only need them if we need them, and nobody is forced to use them.

To find the answer to your question (What happens when the TPG refuses to upgrade it), I would look at an example that's already happening in the market today -- what happens when you crack an NGC 65 coin, send it to PCGS and you get a 64? The submitter realizes either PCGS made a mistake, NGC did, or (gasp) they grade to different standards....Mike

p.s. the CAC isn't the sole arbiter of anything -- it's the still TPGs that are giving the grades, not the CAC, and if they change their grading, shouldn't the TPGs be responsible for either being too loose to begin with or too tight now?

In almost any case I can think of, you'll still pay less for an A or B of MS6x than a C or D of MS6x+1.

 

Think about it.

Agreed. However, can the same be said for today's market on the sell side? I think not, and that's one of the real areas of value-add to a collector like me.

Thanks for the explanation, Catbert -- that makes perfect sense as each one of us values things differently. I hope you have a nice weekend.

Catbert,

What I don't think you realize (and plese correct me if I'm wrong) is that you're probably already paying higher prices for A and B coins....and I wouldn't expect that to change much if the CAC is successful. However, the main reasons I see the CAC as a benefit for collectors like you and I is NOT on the buy side, but rather the sell side...

With a stickered coin you'll KNOW how much your coins are worth (at a minimum) and they will be MORE liquid than before. How many times have you tried to sell a coin to a dealer only to see him whip out his greysheet or bluesheet and quote you a (crappy) price. While I think many collectors are astute enough to figure out who to sell to and who not to, not all of us can. So, if I'm understanding things, with the CAC you will have an alternative to selling for greysheet/bluesheet.

I see the value in this, but understand completely if you (or others) don't.

Respectfully...Mike

If you guys understood how much value has been transferred FROM collectors TO coin doctors and crackout artists over the past decade, you might be a bit more receptive to CAC. I would guesstimate it's in the 8 figure range [hundreds of millions of dollars].

 

Crackout artists are demons. They have the nerve to use their knowledge and risk their capital to try and make a profit. Sickens me. These people are worse than child rapists!

I wouldn't go quite so far and call them "demons" or "rapists", but the term "parasite" seems to fit pretty well.

I don't see what value the crackout artists are providing to collectors and the market in general. Self-interest and greed are not value-adds, and it seems to me that all they are doing is skimming money out of the market IMO...Mike

p.s. TDN, it's 9 figures.

IGWT, we all knew you were smart. The thing I have trouble with is trying to figure out why such a smart guy would like Shield Nickels.

Let's assume I own a pig with a CAC sticker. I believe I can force some CAC market makers to buy the coin. However, I don't believe there are market makers for all the coins, so that may be an issue.

 

Now the market maker that I forced the coin upon can turn the coin over to CAC. CAC is under no obligation to buy it back. They can look at the pig and say it is OK. The market maker is stuck holding this pig. He can force it on to another market maker or sell it to a collector. CAC is in no way forced to buy the coin back. They make the decision if it is worth buying back just like the TPG.

 

This is also similar to Bluesheet coins. I can "hit the bid" for many coins and force them upon the sight unseen buyers. These buyers are stuck with pigs if the TPG says they are OK for the grade.

Thanks for the response, Greg.

I suppose as a collector I care little for the market maker's predicament, being the self-centered, greedy collector that I am.

As long as I can get rid of the coin sight-unseen for a published price, I see a great deal of value in the way CAC does things -- particularly compared to the blueseet bid approach or the TPG self-arbitrated grade review approach.

However, as you point out, an incomplete list of coins in which a market will be made would obviously impact that value-add -- so if that's true, you make a very important and good point.

Take care...Mike

Greg, I think you make a lot of good points, but this one threw me....

MR: How can you hold the line on your grading such that your interpretations won’t change over time, as has happened for the grading services.

JA: Let’s say that we do a poor job. If we do than we have to buy our own coins back and we wouldn’t last very long. We could have $25 million of low-end unsalable inventory and be out of business. So it’s in CAC’s best interest to maintain the standard because we are consuming our own product. It’s like owning a restaurant where we eat every meal, so we’re not going to be serving poor quality food. Or it’s like a prospective home buying desiring to buy a “builder’s home.” Why is that? – because he built it for himself. In effect, we’re grading for ourselves.

But the CAC gets to be the determining party in whether they screwed up. This is no different than what the TPG do. Or does the CAC have an outside organization that reviews their coins for them like John suggested for the TPG? Only seems fair!

If I understand things correctly, it's the coin's owner who decides to "cash out" and sell the coin for CAC-bid prices. So it is not the CAC or an outside arbiter who decides but rather the coin's owner. As opposed to the TPG process who decides if the coin is overgraded and also the amount of compensation (wihch isn't published anywhere and quite different from the TPGs published price guides).

As a collector, the CAC process sounds much more fair to me (provided they publish thir bid prices -- which I've yet to see).

Have I misunderstood something?

Better make that 733, TDN.

Great coins guys. Really love that '28 half cent, Boiler.

NIce coins, everyone!

This one really jumped off the page:

Wow!

Tough coin, Elbesaar. Can't wait to see YOUR pics!...>Mike

Mike (FL), two really attractive large cents there! Are you on a Matron jag now?

I've always been, but progress has been very slow.

It just so happens that I found a few coins that appealed to me in the past few weeks.

Thanks for the kind words...Mike

Nice coins guys!