Would sight unseen trading in slabbed moderns be a good thing?

[truthteller]

Since slabbed moderns are increasing in submissions, do you think sight unseen or sight seen trading would improve market values? It definitely would improve liquidity, but at what level?

 

 

TRUTH

[cladking]

Yes. It would be extremely beneficial to the markets and would increase demand as well as liquidity. Much of the problem is the same as with the classics; grading inconsistency. This is even a larger problem with moderns since the price spreads tend to be higher in slabbed coins. Who wants to bid even 25% of market for a coin which if overgraded is worth far less.

 

Modern grading is likely more consistent because of the nature of the beast but there are still considerations of saleability of weakly struck gems in thin and highly selective markets.

 

Grading these coins on each of their various attributes might be the greatest boon to modern coins and collectors since it would allow for sight unseen trading.

[GDJMSP]

Given the huge number of coins that sell on ebay and other on-line auction venues - it would seem to me that sight unseen is already the dominant method - especially for modern coins. As to whether it would improve market values - I think that has already been demonstrated - at least for the present time.

 

In my opinion realized prices for many moderns have dropped considerably in the past several months if not the past year. I am talking in a general sense for there are still specific cases where new highs are being achieved from time to time. But for the most part they are not. In many cases prices for moderns have dropped 50% or more.

 

Would sight seen trading help change this ? I rather doubt it. For anyone who visits shows or shops is also likely to be aware of availability via the internet. And while there may be a few who would rather make their purchases of moderns sight seen - they will not be likely to forego the chance of a cheaper price when it is readily available.

 

 

[EVillageProwler]

This is even a larger problem with moderns since the price spreads tend to be higher in slabbed coins.

 

Is it? Not to be argumentative, but I think the real cause of the big spread for condition rarities is that the series is particularly hot. Nearly all of us would consider IHC's, Lib 5C and Morgans to be classics. For these series, there is a huge spread for the top grades. Imagine a common date Lib 5C in MS66 vs one in MS67 or even MS68 -- if one exists. The price spread is enormous! Or, PF67DCAM's...

 

And, with IHC's and Morgans, there is so much demand for high-end specimens that aren't rare in an absolute sense.

 

So, in this case, I really don't think it's a moderns issue...

 

EVP

 

[RobertB]

I don't think slabbing too many moderns is a good deal at all. Unless you're piece has some sort of rarity or is worth at least $100, and I mean $100 at PF65 or above, it's a waste of money. I say at PF 65 or above because when the bottom falls out of 69 and 70 moderns, which is soon approaching, that's all that'll matter. The market will not continue to support inflated prices for ultra high grades on moderns. They're so new and the quality is so high you're nearly guranteed a 68. Why pay a condition rarity premium of hundred's of dollars because someone says it's one or two points higher. As far as MS and PF 70 go, that's a crock because that means perfect, and perfection is an impossible achievement. Nothing is perfect. Nothing. (except my wife)

Therefore the subject is all together mute. Let me ask you. If you were scanning ebay, and an auction for a modern commemorative and somewhere it was noted: original, sealed in US Mint capsule, and there was NO picture available. Would you bid it the same as if it had a picture? I would because it's damn sure almost guaranteed to be MS/PF 69/70 right? Of course it is. So we're, or at least I'm, already doing this.

[cladking]

I don't think slabbing too many moderns is a good deal at all. Unless you're piece has some sort of rarity or is worth at least $100, and I mean $100 at PF65 or above, it's a waste of money. I say at PF 65 or above because when the bottom falls out of 69 and 70 moderns, which is soon approaching, that's all that'll matter. The market will not continue to support inflated prices for ultra high grades on moderns. They're so new and the quality is so high you're nearly guranteed a 68. Why pay a condition rarity premium of hundred's of dollars because someone says it's one or two points higher.

 

The term modern is often used to mean all coins made since 1965. Many modern coins don't exist above MS-65 and some don't exist above VF.

[cladking]

This is even a larger problem with moderns since the price spreads tend to be higher in slabbed coins.

 

Is it? Not to be argumentative, but I think the real cause of the big spread for condition rarities is that the series is particularly hot. Nearly all of us would consider IHC's, Lib 5C and Morgans to be classics. For these series, there is a huge spread for the top grades. Imagine a common date Lib 5C in MS66 vs one in MS67 or even MS68 -- if one exists. The price spread is enormous! Or, PF67DCAM's...

 

And, with IHC's and Morgans, there is so much demand for high-end specimens that aren't rare in an absolute sense.

 

So, in this case, I really don't think it's a moderns issue...

 

EVP

 

Obviously you are correct here. My statement should have included the phrase "on a percentage basis". Some moderns have very nominal values in the undergrades.

[EVillageProwler]

Clad,

 

I am really sick and tired of reading your constant moderns-bashing commentary!!! Maybe if you bothered to educate yourself on that area of US numismatics that you'd get a clue!

 

 

EVP

 

[Beijim]

Let me ask you. If you were scanning ebay, and an auction for a modern commemorative and somewhere it was noted: original, sealed in US Mint capsule, and there was NO picture available. Would you bid it the same as if it had a picture? I would because it's damn sure almost guaranteed to be MS/PF 69/70 right?

 

I hope I can disagree without being disagreeable.

 

My answers to the two questions above are No and No.

 

I would bid less were no picture available. In fact, I generally don't bid at all when no photo is provided, as even *with* a photograph I've received a lot of shyte commems on eBay. It's very difficult even with a photo to see surface problems such as hazing and nicks that will prevent even an MS/PF 68 grade.

 

My experience buying raw modern commemoratives on eBay with the intention of getting them graded is that it's a crapshoot. I've had my share of MS/PF 68s. Therefore, I don't agree that 69/70 are almost guaranteed.

 

Beijim

 

[BillJones]

Many modern coins ... don't exist about VF

 

Come on, get serious, Clad! No body on these boards is going to buy into that statement! I don’t even think you could sell that to your friends and supporters on the PCGS board. Your hype is getting so unbelievable that one might have to conclude that you have finally psyched yourself out.

[RobertB]

I don't think slabbing too many moderns is a good deal at all. Unless you're piece has some sort of rarity or is worth at least $100, and I mean $100 at PF65 or above, it's a waste of money. I say at PF 65 or above because when the bottom falls out of 69 and 70 moderns, which is soon approaching, that's all that'll matter. The market will not continue to support inflated prices for ultra high grades on moderns. They're so new and the quality is so high you're nearly guranteed a 68. Why pay a condition rarity premium of hundred's of dollars because someone says it's one or two points higher.

 

The term modern is often used to mean all coins made since 1965. Many modern coins don't exist above MS-65 and some don't exist above VF.

 

I agree with you here to a point. You are correct in stating the term moderns goes from 1965 up. I think I posted in haste as I am so used moderns being used to describing mint issued modern commem.s, proof pieces, and mint set pieces. On that note I admit I was somewhat mistaken. I'm sure you can understand my thinking here.

 

As far as many moderns not existing above MS-65 I have to wholeheartedly disagree. I've yet to here of such an occurrence where a post 1965 coin could not be found in MS-65 or above. Furthermore, regarding moderns not existing in VF or above I am lost. Are you being serious? There is NO, and I mean no, regular issue modern that cannot be found in VF or above.

 

I'm not trying to be personal, in fact, I think this is my first re-buttal-re-buttal post in the four or five months I've been using these boards. Kind of makes you special. Anyways, if you can cite an example of moderns not existing above VF, I'd like to hear it. Maybe I'm wrong. But I don't think so here.

[cladking]

 

As far as many moderns not existing above MS-65 I have to wholeheartedly disagree. I've yet to here of such an occurrence where a post 1965 coin could not be found in MS-65 or above. Furthermore, regarding moderns not existing in VF or above I am lost. Are you being serious? There is NO, and I mean no, regular issue modern that cannot be found in VF or above. :

There are numerous moderns which don't exist above MS-65 and some are regular issues. The '81-S dollar springs to mind.

 

Obviously you are correct that there are no regular issue moderns which do not exist above VF. There are numerous varieties which were not discovered until long after they were issued. Some of these are extremely interesting and form sets in their own right. The type "d" reverse quarters of 1977 to 1984 are of most interest to me and perhaps the most likely to be sought by future collectors. These became increasingly common as the years went by but the early dates are quite elusive. None appear in mint sets except the 1981-P but it is quite scarce in the sets. Very few rolls of these dates were saved and the vast majority of those saved were set aside by only a few individuals. Spot checking has revealed none of these coins in those set aside. The odds of one being set aside inadvertantly is real but the odds are fair that at least one or two do not exist in unc at all. There are other recently discovered varieties which are of equal interest if not as dramatic such as the 1974 reverse of '72. All of these coins are still available in circulation so will not be rare, but some were produced by a single or only a few dies and years of attrition and wear have reduced their populations especially in high grades.

[Beijim]

There are numerous moderns which don't exist above MS-65 and some are regular issues. The '81-S dollar springs to mind.

 

Clad,

 

If you mean the 1981-S Susan B. Anthony $1 coin, there are allegedly 2 graded MS66 by NGC and 73 graded MS66 by PCGS, with none higher at either service.

 

Beijim

 

[cladking]

 

 

 

If you mean the 1981-S Susan B. Anthony $1 coin, there are allegedly 2 graded MS66 by NGC and 73 graded MS66 by PCGS, with none higher at either service.

 

 

 

Thanks for the info. I've never seen one but that's likely just bad luck. MS-65's are tough enough from what I've seen.

[James_OldeTowne]

It can be a good thing. But only if the grading companies TRULY stand behind their grading guarantees. And also, only if the grading companies STAY in business. The instant that guarantee is violated, or they get on shaky financial ground, the whole sight-unseen trade in slabbed moderns would collapse like a house of cards.

 

This is why I think it's an extremely risky business. Sooner or later, there will be no more coins to encapsulate. Without a reason for being in business, how will the companies generate sufficient revenue to back their grading guarantee?

 

James