Is the CAC sticker Fairy floating around the Heritage coin vaults ?

[James_OldeTowne]

I said it was a dark day for COLLECTORS

 

With all due respect, the vast majority of nice coins are currently owned by COLLECTORS. Thus the vast majority of any increase in value goes to COLLECTORS.

 

That's funny. I though there were a 15% buyer's commission, and a 10% seller's commission. Are you saying those commissions are lining the pockets of COLLECTORS?

[Tradedollarnut]

Pretty funny coming from someone who works for an auction house. !

 

No matter how you slice it, the vast majority of any increase in value for rare coins goes to COLLECTORS.

 

[PS - I can get you hammer + 8%. Seller's fees are for chumps! ]

[MarkFeld]

I said it was a dark day for COLLECTORS

 

With all due respect, the vast majority of nice coins are currently owned by COLLECTORS. Thus the vast majority of any increase in value goes to COLLECTORS.

 

That's funny. I though there were a 15% buyer's commission, and a 10% seller's commission. Are you saying those commissions are lining the pockets of COLLECTORS?

The commissions charged by auction houses have nothing, whatsoever to do with who owns most of the nice coins and who profits the most if those coins rise in value. And if a consignor is paying a 10% seller's fee (in addition to the 15% "buyer's commission" that the auction house charges) he has not done his homework and/or is getting a very bad deal.

[carson city]

I believe most coin auction firms are similar to Heritage, in that, if the consignor has previously purchased the coin via their auction, you can subsequently re-auction it for 0% (zero) commission. On high value coins, everything is negotiable !

[gmarguli]

And if a consignor is paying a 10% seller's fee (in addition to the 15% "buyer's commission" that the auction house charges) he has not done his homework and/or is getting a very bad deal.

 

 

So Mark, you're blaming the consignor for not doing their homework? Not all consignor have the vast knowledge or resources of those that are on these forums. Shouldn't the auction house disclose this bad deal upfront to them or at the very least presented alternative deals for the consignor to choose from?

 

Isn't it wrong to blame people for not doing their homework, when it really should be the more knowledgeable party disclosing everything upfront?

[MarkFeld]

And if a consignor is paying a 10% seller's fee (in addition to the 15% "buyer's commission" that the auction house charges) he has not done his homework and/or is getting a very bad deal.

 

 

So Mark, you're blaming the consignor for not doing their homework? Not all consignor have the vast knowledge or resources of those that are on these forums. Shouldn't the auction house disclose this bad deal upfront to them or at the very least presented alternative deals for the consignor to choose from?

 

Isn't it wrong to blame people for not doing their homework, when it really should be the more knowledgeable party disclosing everything upfront?

Greg, it actually does bother me that auction houses sometimes quote a 10% seller's commission. I think that that, on top of the 15% "buyer's premium is excessive, even though non-coin (as in antiques, art, etc.) auction fees can exceed those numbers. And it is particularly disturbing in cases where the material is of especially high value and/or isn't particularly well suited for auction in the first place.

[gmarguli]

And if a consignor is paying a 10% seller's fee (in addition to the 15% "buyer's commission" that the auction house charges) he has not done his homework and/or is getting a very bad deal.

 

 

So Mark, you're blaming the consignor for not doing their homework? Not all consignor have the vast knowledge or resources of those that are on these forums. Shouldn't the auction house disclose this bad deal upfront to them or at the very least presented alternative deals for the consignor to choose from?

 

Isn't it wrong to blame people for not doing their homework, when it really should be the more knowledgeable party disclosing everything upfront?

Greg, it actually does bother me that auction houses sometimes quote a 10% seller's commission. I think that that, on top of the 15% "buyer's premium is excessive, even though non-coin (as in antiques, art, etc.) auction fees can exceed those numbers. And it is particularly disturbing in cases where the material is of especially high value and/or isn't particularly well suited for auction in the first place.

 

I agree that getting 25% is "generous" for an auction house, but you blamed the consignor because "he has not done his homework". Yet, when another issue came up (worked coins), you didn't like my answer of blaming the buyer for not doing their homework. I'm just trying to figure out when it is OK in your opinion to blamed people for not doing their own homework.

 

So far we have:

 

Worked Coins: It is not OK to blame someone for failing to do their homework.

 

Selling Coins: It is OK to blame someone for failing to do their homework.

[IGWT]

Doctored coins are a lie. The "you-should-have-known-I-was-lying" defense doesn't work.

[gmarguli]

Doctored coins are a lie. The "you-should-have-known-I-was-lying" defense doesn't work.

 

No, you're missing the point. This has nothing to do with someones defense, but rather how a third party is viewing the same (in)action by a collector.

 

How can someone fault a collector for not doing their homework in one area, but not another area? Either the collector should be responsible for their (in)actions or they shouldn't. It seems like Mark is tailoring his feeling based on the situation. Mr. Collector got screwed and he should have expected full disclosure and I will absolve him of any wrongdoing. Then, Mr. Collector got screwed, but he should have done his homework so it's his fault.

[MarkFeld]

And if a consignor is paying a 10% seller's fee (in addition to the 15% "buyer's commission" that the auction house charges) he has not done his homework and/or is getting a very bad deal.

 

 

So Mark, you're blaming the consignor for not doing their homework? Not all consignor have the vast knowledge or resources of those that are on these forums. Shouldn't the auction house disclose this bad deal upfront to them or at the very least presented alternative deals for the consignor to choose from?

 

Isn't it wrong to blame people for not doing their homework, when it really should be the more knowledgeable party disclosing everything upfront?

Greg, it actually does bother me that auction houses sometimes quote a 10% seller's commission. I think that that, on top of the 15% "buyer's premium is excessive, even though non-coin (as in antiques, art, etc.) auction fees can exceed those numbers. And it is particularly disturbing in cases where the material is of especially high value and/or isn't particularly well suited for auction in the first place.

 

I agree that getting 25% is "generous" for an auction house, but you blamed the consignor because "he has not done his homework". Yet, when another issue came up (worked coins), you didn't like my answer of blaming the buyer for not doing their homework. I'm just trying to figure out when it is OK in your opinion to blamed people for not doing their own homework.

 

So far we have:

 

Worked Coins: It is not OK to blame someone for failing to do their homework.

 

Selling Coins: It is OK to blame someone for failing to do their homework.

Nice try, but I wasn't "blaming" the collector in the sense that I thought he deserved to be charged too much commission. I was stating that his not doing his homework could result in his paying too much.

 

I didn't say that I thought that was acceptable or OK. On the contrary, I don't think an auction house should take advantage of an uninformed consignor, just as I don't think a coin doctor should take advantage of an unsuspecting buyer. I believe in straight and fair dealings and that my position on auction consignments is perfectly consistent with my position on coin doctors.

[Tradedollarnut]

The skill level necessary to detect coin doctoring or high/low splits on grades on your own is CONSIDERABLY higher than that to determine the appropriate level of auction commissions.

[IGWT]

Doctored coins are a lie. The "you-should-have-known-I-was-lying" defense doesn't work.

 

No, you're missing the point. This has nothing to do with someones defense, but rather how a third party is viewing the same (in)action by a collector.

 

How can someone fault a collector for not doing their homework in one area, but not another area? Either the collector should be responsible for their (in)actions or they shouldn't. It seems like Mark is tailoring his feeling based on the situation. Mr. Collector got screwed and he should have expected full disclosure and I will absolve him of any wrongdoing. Then, Mr. Collector got screwed, but he should have done his homework so it's his fault.

I do not blame a collector for being taken in by a lie (or fraud or intentional misrepresentation or call it what you will), regardless of whether or not he was doing his homework. That's the point I was trying to make. The lack of diligence does not diminish the blameworthiness of the person who commits the deceit. I'd say the same thing if an auction house were to use to deceit to realize a higher commission, but I don't think that was part of the situation we were discussing.

[gmarguli]

I do not blame a collector for being taken in by a lie (or fraud or intentional misrepresentation or call it what you will), regardless of whether or not he was doing his homework. That's the point I was trying to make. The lack of diligence does not diminish the blameworthiness of the person who commits the deceit. I'd say the same thing if an auction house were to use to deceit to realize a higher commission, but I don't think that was part of the situation we were discussing.

 

It's all the same. A person decided on a course of action without doing their homework. No lies involved, only transactions (buy/sell, consign/commission, etc).

 

Are you aware that the "premium" gasoline is really unnecessary for a vast majority of cars on the road. Should I be upset with the deceit of the gas stations for selling this without disclosing that it will have no positive affect on my car or with myself for not doing my homework? It's easy to blame the seller. It's almost the feel good thing to do. However, since Mark admonished the collector for not doing their homework about the auction house commission, I'd just like to see how far this goes with people taking PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for their (in)actions. It appears that when it is the easy thing to do, then it is OK. :shrug:

[MarkFeld]

I do not blame a collector for being taken in by a lie (or fraud or intentional misrepresentation or call it what you will), regardless of whether or not he was doing his homework. That's the point I was trying to make. The lack of diligence does not diminish the blameworthiness of the person who commits the deceit. I'd say the same thing if an auction house were to use to deceit to realize a higher commission, but I don't think that was part of the situation we were discussing.

 

It's all the same. A person decided on a course of action without doing their homework. No lies involved, only transactions (buy/sell, consign/commission, etc).

 

Are you aware that the "premium" gasoline is really unnecessary for a vast majority of cars on the road. Should I be upset with the deceit of the gas stations for selling this without disclosing that it will have no positive affect on my car or with myself for not doing my homework? It's easy to blame the seller. It's almost the feel good thing to do. However, since Mark admonished the collector for not doing their homework about the auction house commission, I'd just like to see how far this goes with people taking PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for their (in)actions. It appears that when it is the easy thing to do, then it is OK. :shrug:

Greg I did not "admonish" the collector - I stated what could happen if he didn't do his homework. And I didn't condone the result. If you didn't read my previous post which was written in reply to you on that matter, please feel free to do so.

[IGWT]

No lies involved . . .

As I wrote before, I view doctored coins as a lie. If you reject that premise, then it's not surprising that you disagree with the rest.

[gmarguli]

Greg I did not "admonish" the collector - I stated what could happen if he didn't do his homework. And I didn't condone the result. If you didn't read my previous post which was written in reply to you on that matter, please feel free to do so.

 

I'm not saying that you condone the result, but here is what you said: And if a consignor is paying a 10% seller's fee (in addition to the 15% "buyer's commission" that the auction house charges) he has not done his homework and/or is getting a very bad deal.

 

Since you stated that if the consignor is paying those fees, he has not done his homework, I assumed that you were admonishing the consignor for not doing his homework. After all, had you thought he was being screwed by the auction house, I'd have assumed you'd have stated that instead of the "homework comment". I guess I was confused as I'm just so used to you posting what you actually mean to say instead of alluding to the opposite.

[MarkFeld]

Greg I did not "admonish" the collector - I stated what could happen if he didn't do his homework. And I didn't condone the result. If you didn't read my previous post which was written in reply to you on that matter, please feel free to do so.

 

I'm not saying that you condone the result, but here is what you said: And if a consignor is paying a 10% seller's fee (in addition to the 15% "buyer's commission" that the auction house charges) he has not done his homework and/or is getting a very bad deal.

 

Since you stated that if the consignor is paying those fees, he has not done his homework, I assumed that you were admonishing the consignor for not doing his homework. After all, had you thought he was being screwed by the auction house, I'd have assumed you'd have stated that instead of the "homework comment". I guess I was confused as I'm just so used to you posting what you actually mean to say instead of alluding to the opposite.

You assumed incorrectly, perhaps because you wanted to. My original post which you misinterpreted was in reply to:

That's funny. I though there were a 15% buyer's commission, and a 10% seller's commission. Are you saying those commissions are lining the pockets of COLLECTORS?

My point was that a consignor shouldn't have to pay a 10% seller's commission and that if he was paying it, it was because he hadn't done his homework. I should have added that I don't condone an auction house taking advantage of such a situation. Clear?

[gmarguli]

My point was that a consignor shouldn't have to pay a 10% seller's commission and that if he was paying it, it was because he hadn't done his homework. I should have added that I don't condone an auction house taking advantage of such a situation. Clear?

 

Pretty clear. The seller was stupid for not doing his homework, but you blame the auction house for taking advantage of the stupid seller who didn't do their homework.

[MarkFeld]

My point was that a consignor shouldn't have to pay a 10% seller's commission and that if he was paying it, it was because he hadn't done his homework. I should have added that I don't condone an auction house taking advantage of such a situation. Clear?

 

Pretty clear. The seller was stupid for not doing his homework, but you blame the auction house for taking advantage of the stupid seller who didn't do their homework.

Close enough, but I prefer to use the word "trusting" in place of "stupid".

[Tradedollarnut]

Yawn.

[MikeInFL]

You guys arguing made me forget what this darn thread was about.

 

CC got a CAC sticker for free from Heritage.

 

Does anyone have a link to the coin?

 

CC, Do/did you think it was PQ?

 

Inquiring minds want to know!

[DirtyGoldMan]

You guys arguing made me forget what this darn thread was about.

 

CC got a CAC sticker for free from Heritage.

 

Does anyone have a link to the coin?

 

CC, Do/did you think it was PQ?

 

Inquiring minds want to know!

 

I was more interested in the bickering. Can someone please wake up those west coasters, so it will resume?

[MarkFeld]

You guys arguing made me forget what this darn thread was about.

 

CC got a CAC sticker for free from Heritage.

 

Does anyone have a link to the coin?

 

CC, Do/did you think it was PQ?

 

Inquiring minds want to know!

 

I was more interested in the bickering. Can someone please wake up those west coasters, so it will resume?

So who called me from area code 314 and woke me up at approximately 5:04 PST this morning?

 

[MorganMan]

I had a sudden thought about these CAC stickers. I am sure maybe it has been mentioned in one of the many threads about this subject.

 

I see CAC sticker counterfieting as the problem in the future. If you do not think holograms can be copied, just ask Microsoft...

 

With no database and serial #'s to verify by, it will become no more than another sticker to remove much like those little price stickers you have to get off of a slab....

 

I can bet you the first batch is being or has already been printed up by now.

 

MM

[carson city]

MikeinFL----I would like to believe all of my coins are PQ. CAC via Heritage apparently thought also. My problem is, that without any written standards or photos for comparison for receiving the CAC Sticker, is it just another arbitrary designation-----akin to a * designation ? !

[MarkFeld]

I had a sudden thought about these CAC stickers. I am sure maybe it has been mentioned in one of the many threads about this subject.

 

I see CAC sticker counterfieting as the problem in the future. If you do not think holograms can be copied, just ask Microsoft...

 

With no database and serial #'s to verify by, it will become no more than another sticker to remove much like those little price stickers you have to get off of a slab....

 

I can bet you the first batch is being or has already been printed up by now.

 

MM

Don't be so certain that there won't be a database with the availability of serial number verification. But I don't disagree that counterfeiting is something to be concerned about, especially since some major third party grading company holders have already been counterfeited. Do you worry about that too?

[MorganMan]

I had a sudden thought about these CAC stickers. I am sure maybe it has been mentioned in one of the many threads about this subject.

 

I see CAC sticker counterfieting as the problem in the future. If you do not think holograms can be copied, just ask Microsoft...

 

With no database and serial #'s to verify by, it will become no more than another sticker to remove much like those little price stickers you have to get off of a slab....

 

I can bet you the first batch is being or has already been printed up by now.

 

MM

Don't be so certain that there won't be a database with the availability of serial number verification. But I don't disagree that counterfeiting is something to be concerned about, especially since some major third party grading company holders have already been counterfeited. Do you worry about that too?

 

Of course, I worry about holders too....but it is a LOT easier to print up a sticker, than to fake holders stickers and the whole shooting match.....and frankly, I would be much better able to detect the difference between an AU58 coin in a fake MS63 slab than I would to detect a fake CAC sticker on a real MS63 slab.

 

MM

 

OH NO.... What if there was a fake slab with a fake CAC sticker.

[MarkFeld]

I had a sudden thought about these CAC stickers. I am sure maybe it has been mentioned in one of the many threads about this subject.

 

I see CAC sticker counterfieting as the problem in the future. If you do not think holograms can be copied, just ask Microsoft...

 

With no database and serial #'s to verify by, it will become no more than another sticker to remove much like those little price stickers you have to get off of a slab....

 

I can bet you the first batch is being or has already been printed up by now.

 

MM

Don't be so certain that there won't be a database with the availability of serial number verification. But I don't disagree that counterfeiting is something to be concerned about, especially since some major third party grading company holders have already been counterfeited. Do you worry about that too?

 

Of course, I worry about holders too....but it is a LOT easier to print up a sticker, than to fake holders stickers and the whole shooting match.....and frankly, I would be much better able to detect the difference between an AU58 coin in a fake MS63 slab than I would to detect a fake CAC sticker on a real MS63 slab.

 

MM

Fair point, but what about being able to tell the difference between an 62 coin and an MS63 coin in a fake slab? And even that small difference in grade could account for a far greater difference in price/value than that between a CAC stickered coin vs. a non-CAC stickered coin.

[DirtyGoldMan]

I personally am approximately 100 times more concerned about fake slabs than I am fake stickers. If you buy a coin with a fake sticker, at worst you have a coin authenticated by a TPG at a particular grade. If you buy a coin in a fake slab, who knows what you have, and there is no guarantee whatsoever.

[IGWT]

I personally am approximately 100 times more concerned about fake slabs than I am fake stickers. If you buy a coin with a fake sticker, at worst you have a coin authenticated by a TPG at a particular grade. If you buy a coin in a fake slab, who knows what you have, and there is no guarantee whatsoever.

Damn! Before you know it, we'll have to examine the coins themselves.