CAC Dealers...

[okbustchaser]

I'm very surprised to see this claim being made. As a collector myself, I can postively state that any "run up in price" for coins is a big time negative for me - definitely not a benefit.

 

When housing prices move upwards, do you also claim there is no benefit for home owners?

 

I don't see one, no. The fact that the market--even now--says that my house is worth double what I paid for it helps me in no way. It's not for sale. It won't be for sale in the foreseeable future. If I did sell at the inflated price then any "profit" would either go into the inflated price of my new house or to the government as taxes. The runup in the market has, however, resulted in an increase in both my real estate taxes and in my insurance premiums--neither of which I see as a "benefit".

 

Hmm, sounds pretty much like my coin collection.

[James_OldeTowne]

I'm very surprised to see this claim being made. As a collector myself, I can postively state that any "run up in price" for coins is a big time negative for me - definitely not a benefit.

 

When housing prices move upwards, do you also claim there is no benefit for home owners?

 

I don't see one, no. The fact that the market--even now--says that my house is worth double what I paid for it helps me in no way. It's not for sale. It won't be for sale in the foreseeable future. If I did sell at the inflated price then any "profit" would either go into the inflated price of my new house or to the government as taxes. The runup in the market has, however, resulted in an increase in both my real estate taxes and in my insurance premiums--neither of which I see as a "benefit".

 

Hmm, sounds pretty much like my coin collection.

Naturally, if housing prices jump, that's a benefit to someone who happens to be selling (as okbustchaser is pointing out). But by far, most home ownerse I know want to LIVE in their house! not just sell it. After all, they bought it to live in it! And, I know more people wanting to buy houses than sell them - if they even happen to be living in one.

 

Maybe I'm missing the logic here, but a "run up in prices" sounds very much akin to inflation, and inflation is to the average American consumer what a "run up in prices" is to the average American coin collector - a negative, not a benefit.

 

the fact that you don't know and hadn't heard of John Albanese has nothing to do with his knowledge and abilities. Ask around a little bit of those who know such things - he is generally acknowledged as one of THE top few coin graders there is, period.

I realize my ignorance of John Albanese has no impact on John's skills - pretty obvious, but it has an enormous impact on my level of trust in him. Basically, it means I have no trust in him at all! Why would I trust someone I've never met, read about, spoken to, or barely heard of? And, it just so happens that I have asked other collector friends about him, and hardly any of them ever heard of him either. Indeed, he was usually confused with some other "Albanese" that runs a coin store.

 

I believe you when you say that you think he's a top grader, and I believe you when you say other folks think he's a top grader, but that does nothing at all for my level of trust. I have never read the slightest snippet written by John Albanese about how to grade coins. And, the CAC website, as I've just discovered, says nothing whatsoever about what their "grading standards" are! They just state that they have some kind of standard. I'm just supposed to "trust" that John's a top grader just because other people that I also don't know say that he is? No thanks. For now, I'm going to rely on NGC and PCGS, whom I have heard of and know something of, as well as the many numismatic friends I have who are more knowledgeable than me and who share their knowledge.

 

For those who do know Albanese and trust him implicitly, I'm glad for them and that they have someone they trust. That's a good feeling.

[Tradedollarnut]

The fact that the market--even now--says that my house is worth double what I paid for it helps me in no way. It's not for sale. It won't be for sale in the foreseeable future. If I did sell at the inflated price then any "profit" would either go into the inflated price of my new house or to the government as taxes.

 

Since coins rarely have property taxes or insurance, let's focus on the rest.

 

There are benefits, you're just ignoring them. You can qualifiy for loans based on your home's equity. You can put your kids through college. You also have the option to move to an area of lower real estate prices - and many times own your new home free and clear. You also have the option to sell and use the money as you please and just rent. In fact, many people can retire earlier due to the equity in their home.

 

Much like they can retire earlier due to the equity in their collection.

 

 

[MarkFeld]

I'm very surprised to see this claim being made. As a collector myself, I can postively state that any "run up in price" for coins is a big time negative for me - definitely not a benefit.

 

When housing prices move upwards, do you also claim there is no benefit for home owners?

 

And, while you, personally, might look upon price increases (where applicable) as a negative, plenty of collectors who sell will look at it as a plus. It is not just about YOU

 

Whoa, now just hold on a minute! IF it just so happens at the time of a price run up that I'm wanting to sell, sure, that helps out me - one collector out of many. But generally speaking, isn't a "collector" someone who wants to BUY coins? as they work toward furthering their collection ?

 

I haven't taken a formal poll of any sort, but off the top of my head, I can't think of any active coin collector I know personally who thinks a "run up in prices" will benefit him ! On the contrary, ALL the talk I hear is about how coin prices are too high! Sure, Mark, as you said, it isn't all about me personally, but I'll be darned if I want to pay even more now for bust halves than I have been since they've about tripled in cost over the past couple of years.

 

Gentlemen, I'm sorry, but if CAC is touting a "run up in prices" as a "benefit" that they are providing for collectors, then there is no way in heck I can possibly believe they have collectors' interests at heart. On the contrary, as someone else stated, it would have to be one of the most blatant and prolific numismatic money grabs ever.

 

Please tell me that CAC does not seriously believe that a coin price run up is somehow good for collectors or the hobby, please.

 

Am I just plain wrong here? Do any of my fellow board members, besides Mark and Bruce, think that a price run up, in general, benefits us as collectors?

James, I believe that YOU are the one who seems most focused on and talking about a "run-up" in prices. I am also of the opinion that the values of countless coins are unaffected, so there is no widespread doom and gloom for collectors, because of CAC. I have stressed from the beginning that I like CAC for the (second) expert opinion that it offers and that people should make use of that or not as they please. So please don't put words in my mouth.

[James_OldeTowne]

James, I believe that YOU are the one who seems most focused on and talking about a "run-up" in prices.

Mark, the discussion of "run up in price" was introduced by TDN, not me. I'l quote him here for your convenience:

 

That's because the vast majority of undergraded coins are owned by COLLECTORS, not dealers. In fact, COLLECTORS are the ones that own the vast majority of nice for the grade coins, too. So any run up in price benefits whom the most? COLLECTORS.

 

I have stressed from the beginning that I like CAC for the (second) expert opinion that it offers and that people should make use of that or not as they please. So please don't put words in my mouth.

Which words ?

[BillJones]

Bill, CAC doesn't claim to be "so great and so much better than NGC and PCGS", so please don't use a straw man argument to make your point.

 

I have not built any straw men here. The mere fact the CAC is in the business of second guessing the grades that NGC and PCGS assign to coins implicitly places them in the role of “ultimate verifier” for those two companies’ products. Therefore they are setting themselves up as the “superior service.” And since they don’t offer the complete service of grading, authenticating coins and encapsulating, they are still no more than kibitzers. They are not taking the same risk as the leading TPGs.

 

I am a very blunt person who tells it way I see it. So with all due respect and at the risk of offending some, I’m going to make this point. Most of the people who vociferously defend CAC here have a vested interest in the success of the company. They are fully committed to the CAC marketing of the concept for personal gain.

 

There is nothing wrong with that. That’s capitalism. But consumers are better off if they know where the advocates are coming from when they read their posts.

 

And for my part, I have vested interest in CAC too. I have no interest in having to spend thousands of dollars in CAC fees plus shipping costs to have my collection re-graded. I’m also not thrilled with the risk that I would to take of having my coins lost or stolen in the mail. It took me years of searching and saving and considerable expense to acquire the coins in my collection.

 

So there I’ve laid out my case in plain English. You can now criticize me until hell freezes over, but that’s my position.

 

[DirtyGoldMan]

1) It is causing a price run-up on coins with the sticker.

 

2) It is causing the grading services to undergrade most of their submissions so that they will meet with CAC's approval.

 

A lot of posts have come back and forth, but no one has yet offered proof of this supposed run-up in prices on account of the CAC. It is just stated as a fact, which I think is wrong.

 

I have noticed that the CAC gold sticker is invariably an indication of a substantial price boost on a coin over other nice coins for grade.

 

Again, I have seen a total of zero offered for sale. Please post some links to these, so we all can see the evidence.

 

I do agree with James that a run-up in prices does little to benefit the true collector. It only benefits the sellers, including the collector/investor types. I personally would rather see lower prices, so I can afford to buy the coins that I would like to own.

[mommam17]

Bill- I don`t see them as second guessing the TPG`s. After over 20 years of grading, all coins with the same CORRECT grade are not the same. CAC is separating the nice A`s and B`s from the lowly C`s. Even though the lowly C`s are graded correctly they do not receive a sticker. An example would be the Lexington commem half that in MS65 could be bought for under $400, but the nicer ones are usually closer to $500.

[MarkFeld]

James, I believe that YOU are the one who seems most focused on and talking about a "run-up" in prices.

Mark, the discussion of "run up in price" was introduced by TDN, not me. I'l quote him here for your convenience:

 

That's because the vast majority of undergraded coins are owned by COLLECTORS, not dealers. In fact, COLLECTORS are the ones that own the vast majority of nice for the grade coins, too. So any run up in price benefits whom the most? COLLECTORS.

 

I have stressed from the beginning that I like CAC for the (second) expert opinion that it offers and that people should make use of that or not as they please. So please don't put words in my mouth.

Which words ?

James, if TDN introduced the "run up in price" topic, you have certainly been the one that has run with it and repeated it a number of times. I also feel that you have exaggerated the situation considerably, without giving specific/relevant examples of how you and others have been negatively impacted.

 

"Which words?" From your previous post: "Do any of my fellow board members, besides Mark and Bruce, think that a price run up, in general, benefits us as collectors?"

 

Edited to add: You have also focused on the supposed higher costs for collectors who are buying, yet pretty much ignored the higher selling prices for those who are selling. Numerous collectors sell coins on a daily basis, sometimes to get out of coins and other times to raise funds for (other) coins. It is a two way street, even for many collectors, or we wouldn't see nearly as many coins available for sale as we do.

[okbustchaser]

The fact that the market--even now--says that my house is worth double what I paid for it helps me in no way. It's not for sale. It won't be for sale in the foreseeable future. If I did sell at the inflated price then any "profit" would either go into the inflated price of my new house or to the government as taxes.

 

Since coins rarely have property taxes or insurance, let's focus on the rest.

 

There are benefits, you're just ignoring them. You can qualifiy for loans based on your home's equity. You can put your kids through college. You also have the option to move to an area of lower real estate prices - and many times own your new home free and clear. You also have the option to sell and use the money as you please and just rent. In fact, many people can retire earlier due to the equity in their home.

 

Much like they can retire earlier due to the equity in their collection.

 

 

I can go twice as far into debt as I did when I first bought my home. BENEFIT??? To whom other than my morgage carrier?

 

I can put my kids though college? I already did, and it didn't take a second morgage on my home to do it. It merely took early financial planning on my part (plus 3 smart kids all of whom did their part.)

 

I can move to an area of lower real estate prices - and many times own my new home free and clear.? Why would I want to? My job is here...My family is here...My roots are here. Plus, I already own it free and clear.

 

I have the option to sell it and rent? The reason I bought it in the first place was so that I DIDN'T have to make someone else's morgage payment. Why would I want to rent now?

 

I can possibly retire earlier? The only "benefit" that I can find in your post. Even with that IMO anyone who thinks that they can retire early strictly on the inflated price of their house either has way too much house for their financial statis or is going to be VERY disappointed by the change in their life style after retirement.

[ctrl-migration]

In investigating CAC and thinking about the ramifications of the service and the nature of the business, my question is similar to one posted earlier here:

 

If they are confident enough to nearly guarantee their green stickers are "good for the grade" and gold are "exceed the grade" then why do they not have orange and red stickers for "poor for the grade" and "excessive grade" as well? Why not engrave their designation into the very plastic instead of a sticker?

 

Of course, the easy answer to this is less people would use their service because of the risk that would be introduced. Meaning, any statement of doing anything 'good for the community' is to be taken with a very large stone of salt. It's all about profit and only that. They are effectively placing themselves as the superior graders, supervising the other TPGs, as BillJones similarly said, but much less risk to them.

 

I for one appreciate the idea of having a second opinion - always a good thing, but dislike the idea of this becoming something that is so widespread that people in general rely on it so much that the work put into the first grade becomes nearly meaningless, or that a AU-55 gold sticker ends up being somehow more valuable in the layman's eyes than an AU-58 with superior lustre. Will we reach a point where, if you purchase a gold CAC sticker coin, have it re-graded at a higher level, the value of the coin actually drops?

 

I don't think that the TPGs will be undergrading so as to support a competitor. Since they also want their customers to be happy, they still have a potential interest in a slight overgrading bias if there is any at all. If a TPG grade comes back with no CAC sticker, it's obviously not stopping some people from proclaiming that it should have been stickered in the first place, and the customer would have a higher grade anyway.

 

The only real solution, as always with any grading dispute, is for coin purchasers to have a better understanding and better skills at grading. But it's unlikely that will widespreadly happen, so...roud we go.

[James_OldeTowne]

James, if TDN introduced the "run up in price" topic, you have certainly been the one that has run with it and repeated it a number of times.

To be fair, I think I've posted about the "run up in price" topic fewer times than the "benefits" have been discussed just in this one thread.

 

"Which words?" From your previous post: "Do any of my fellow board members, besides Mark and Bruce, think that a price run up, in general, benefits us as collectors?"

Mark, you wrote: "plenty of collectors who sell will look at it [run up in price] as a plus", so yes, you didn't state "in general", but you also didn't point out that many collectors who are buying will not look at it as a plus. I contend that collectors do more buying than selling, and therefore, more will look at it as a negative.

 

Edited to add: You have also focused on the supposed higher costs for collectors who are buying, yet pretty much ignored the higher selling prices for those who are selling.

I didn't ignore it at all. I specifically pointed out that folks in the group of collectors I associate with (and it's a big group) do far more buying than selling. After all, "collecting" implies "acquiring".

 

I think I'm done with this discussion. I've made my point, and feel like this is bogging down into another silly semantics thread (my fault, perhaps). In short, I simply believe that a "run up in prices", which is presented in this thread as a CAC benefit to collectors, is not a benefit at all, because collectors, most of whom I believe want to buy coins, would suffer from having to pay ever escalating prices. I also admit that a run up in price has not been proven, but I also wasn't the one who introduced that topic.

[BillJones]

Bill- I don`t see them as second guessing the TPG`s. After over 20 years of grading, all coins with the same CORRECT grade are not the same. CAC is separating the nice A`s and B`s from the lowly C`s. Even though the lowly C`s are graded correctly they do not receive a sticker. An example would be the Lexington commem half that in MS65 could be bought for under $400, but the nicer ones are usually closer to $500.

 

You have just turned the argument on yourself. Let’s say that CAC is really only looking for the A and B coins AND they succeed in convincing the market that you need their sticker to verify those grades. If that happens all of the your PCGS and NGC graded coins will in effect become raw coins. You will have to have all of your important coins re-graded by CAC in order to get the market price for them. And in a word that sucks.

 

I am not giving the CAC concept a free pass. It could cost many collectors who have loyal to this hobby for many years a lot of money. And that money would be a wealth transfer from collectors to the marketers who are pushing CAC so strongly.

 

[MikeInFL]

Who woulda' thunk a little sticker would get so many people's panties in a wad? I truly don't understand the backlash, as I look at the sticker just like a slab -- just an opinion to be used in helping evaluate a coin.

[Tradedollarnut]

Which costs more for collectors - thinking all coins are the same at the same grade and selling their nice PQ stuff for ordinary prices ... or differentiating their well selected coins with a CAC sticker and receiving top dollar for them?

 

Which costs more for collectors - paying a bit more and receiving a coin that's all there and has an active bid network for it when he decides to sell .... or buying an overgraded pig for a 'bargain' price and then having no buyers at any level when he decides to sell?

[mommam17]

Bill. I`ve read your posts for a long time. You are a vetern numismatist and I would guess you have a GREAT collection with lots of eye appealing coins. It might cost you alot to have them stickered. If the coins were mine, I would want them stickered, if possible. I think your feeling about CAC has alot to do with this added expence for you. Mabe you don`t want anything to do with CAC. But I think if you have any interest at all in CAC, I would call John Albanese. I wanted to add that I`ve collected coins only 5 years less than you!

[Tradedollarnut]

Or it might cost you nothing to have them stickered. Just go to CoinFest.

[mommam17]

That`s why I said might cost you alot!!! I think Bill is a long way from Coinfest. I am 1 town over from Coinfest, 10 minutes away. It will be in a beautiful place this year!

[MarkFeld]

Which costs more for collectors - thinking all coins are the same at the same grade and selling their nice PQ stuff for ordinary prices ... or differentiating their well selected coins with a CAC sticker and receiving top dollar for them?

 

Which costs more for collectors - paying a bit more and receiving a coin that's all there and has an active bid network for it when he decides to sell .... or buying an overgraded pig for a 'bargain' price and then having no buyers at any level when he decides to sell?

Well, Bruce, there are of course, many exceptions to that (such as particulalry knowledgeable collectors who aren't negatively impacted by the above). And I have a sneaking suspicion that someone will come along and focus on those exceptions, rather than the far more plentiful instances

 

Who woulda' thunk a little sticker would get so many people's panties in a wad? I truly don't understand the backlash, as I look at the sticker just like a slab -- just an opinion to be used in helping evaluate a coin.

Very well said, Mike, even if I am one of those with "panties in a wad" on occasion.

[Tradedollarnut]

Mark: I have no problem with exceptions. There are exceptions to pretty much everything. However, one does not build one's business model around exceptions - one goes for generalities.

 

In general, it's a useful service for those who need it. Some people don't ... ok, no problem. Other than the fact they continue to bash what they personally don't need but others might.

 

[Conder101]

You have just turned the argument on yourself. Let’s say that CAC is really only looking for the A and B coins AND they succeed in convincing the market that you need their sticker to verify those grades. If that happens all of the your PCGS and NGC graded coins will in effect become raw coins. You will have to have all of your important coins re-graded by CAC in order to get the market price for them. And in a word that sucks

That expresses how I feel about this mess perfectly. Years ago collectors tried to be as knowledgeable as they could about their coins and built up nice collections then the grading services came along and as they became wide accepted the collectors found that no one would pay them a reasonable price for their coins unless they paid the grading services to bless them. ("Whyaren't they slabbed by PCGS or NGC? There must be something wrong with them.") So they did and the grading services made money hand over fist. Now CAC comes along and as it becomes widespread established the collectors find that the money they spent getting the grading services blessing now will have to be spent again to get CAC's blessing if they want their coins to get serious consideration when they go to sell. ("Why don't they have CAC stickers? They must be low end for the grade.") I wouldn't be surprised to see yet another layer put on in 15 to 20 years where the collector will have to pay to have his CAC approved coins certified by yet another service.

[Tradedollarnut]

In a way, I agree. It would have been a great thing if the TPG's had held the line on grading instead of a steady decay in standards. Had been effective at keeping all doctored coins out of their holders. Had instituted the policy that if they weren't sure, it wouldn't be holdered instead of just the opposite.

 

But they didn't.

[EZ_E]

It is human nature to render an opinion based upon how that certain event has personally affected them, as an individual. We are selfish, as a whole.

 

So, for me, CAC is a detriment, yet I am not so obtuse that I can not see the merrits of the company, which are valid.

 

Other than the fact they continue to bash what they personally don't need but others might.

 

I don't embrace the concept because it is having a direct, negative impact upon me, personally. I have lots of coins that I need to submit, many high-grade classic proofs. Why waste money to have them undergraded?

 

If I were selling, then sure, I'd probably come out ahead since I try to get PQ coins when at all possible. Usually, a premium is involved for the nice coins on the market. Not a problem there. The problem I have with a CAC label is that at worse, it tags a coin as "acceptable" for the grade. A mere "acceptable" for the grade coin is not worthy of a premium. This is where the door for abuse is opened.

 

Ravenut, It would not be appropriate of me to reveal the sources of my information w/o their consent concerning how tight the services are. But anyone with their finger on the pulse of the hobby knows that this is true.

 

As far as evidence to support the "run-up" of prices. Do your own research. Find adds with CAC coins and compare them to current market prices.

[DirtyGoldMan]

As far as evidence to support the "run-up" of prices. Do your own research. Find adds with CAC coins and compare them to current market prices.

 

Ah, as I suspected. There is no run-up.

[EZ_E]

As far as evidence to support the "run-up" of prices. Do your own research. Find adds with CAC coins and compare them to current market prices.

 

Ah, as I suspected. There is no run-up.

 

That's retarded logic.

 

Why don't you set out to disprove the idea that there is a "run-up" in prices. Prove the statement wrong. Do something constructive and do your own leg work.

[MikeInFL]

RYK wasn't the one suggesting there was, Vic, so it isn't fair, in my opinion, to put the burden of proof on him. Shouldn't the burden of proof be with those suggesting there has been a run-up in price?

 

That said, and assuming there has been a run up in coin prices (which quite frankly I don't buy, but will keep an open mind if someone shows me evidence), how can one prove that the price appreciation wasn't market-oriented rather than sticker-driven, or the stickered coins themselves are (gasp) actually better on average than their non-stickered bretheren and deserving of a premium?

[Revenant]

Ravenut, It would not be appropriate of me to reveal the sources of my information w/o their consent concerning how tight the services are. But anyone with their finger on the pulse of the hobby knows that this is true.

 

Who or what is "Ravenut?" I really hope that isn't a reference to me but I can't find anyone participating in this discussion whose name even resembles that.

[DirtyGoldMan]

As far as evidence to support the "run-up" of prices. Do your own research. Find adds with CAC coins and compare them to current market prices.

 

Ah, as I suspected. There is no run-up.

 

That's retarded logic.

 

Why don't you set out to disprove the idea that there is a "run-up" in prices. Prove the statement wrong. Do something constructive and do your own leg work.

 

You made a false and misleading claim, not me. I do my leg work daily and have not seen any run-up in the areas that I collect. But because I am not afraid to put my money where my mouth is:

 

From Doug Winter's inventory:

 

1849-C $5.00 PCGS AU-58 CAC 5/12 21/33 9000 $6,350

 

This is exactly what this coin would/should run in AU-58, with or without the sticker. Doug has been selling such coins on his website for this price for the past two years.

 

1856-D $5.00 PCGS AU-55 CAC 13/31 16/34 6000 $4,250

 

I sold a PCGS AU-55 for about the same price last year. No sticker on mine, sticker on this one.

 

Now from Mark Feld's inventory:

 

*NEW* 1853 Arrows&Rays Seated Liberty Half Dollar NGC/CAC AU55 $1,050

 

I purchased the same coin in a 55 holder a couple years ago for the same $1000.

 

Okay, EZ_E, your turn.

 

 

[CHABSENTIA]

This is what I predicted earlier. It is all about the Money

And I'll strongly disagree with that. If it were really "all about the money" as you say, CAC would evaluate modern coinage as well, which, as you know (or should know) is a huge potential source of revenue. I challenge you to reconcile that FACT with your "all about the money" accusation.

 

Do you really believe that there would be a lot of submissions for modern coins?

 

Also, from a marketing perspective it can make sense for them to exclude a section of the market that is viewed by many - including their main customers (dealers) - as being beneath them.

 

It certainly is all about the Money for some. Many people from their comments in the beginning felt that it would add to its value. Remember the forums here where the first CAC stickered coin was mentioned as being sold on EBAY. It was part of the Sellers spiel that the sticker itself added to the value. While there were some who felt that CAC was needed to guarantee the grades of the CAC there wer still these people. It is now obvious given the earlier examples in this thread such as 'it should be............etc".The dealers making these type of comments are clearly not satisfied about the degree of thwe CAC sticker which is the same situation that existed before about the grading policies of the TPGs.

 

Nothing has changed except another layer of opinion and an extra cost to give that extra opinion. So here we are. On one hand we have a sticker which some feel should increase the value or by its presence and on the other hand we have people who have to spend an added cost for the CAC Sticker so does involve money.

 

I thought the original idea was to just guarantee the grade. Now we have different colors where the grade is not only met but shoukld be higher?I assume nobody here is going to ask the same price for a sticker that represents that a grade should be higher so again it is about the money..Why are these dealers saying that the ones stickered should actually grade higher? Why not sell the coin for waht the sticker represents? Again it is about the Money.

 

There is not doubt in my mind that there were some regardless of the percentage that had an Elitist view and hoped that CAC would take the place of the TPG

 

 

Could it be possible that CAC is not stickering the 'Modern" coins because many are uncirculated and in Proof condition as well as other recent attributes and they don't have the opportuntites for the differences in grades as they do for the older circulated coins?This would be another aspect of Money in that the opportunites wouldn't be there as much in the Moderns.

 

[CHABSENTIA]

"Hell is paved with good intentions"

 

CAC, in my opinion, is detrimental to the average, knowledgeable collector.

 

1) It is causing a price run-up on coins with the sticker.

 

2) It is causing the grading services to undergrade most of their submissions so that they will meet with CAC's approval.

 

Sure, there's a winning side but that means that there must be a loser, too, to having a winner.

 

Which was my observation in an earlier post.