Incomplete Certification of NGC coins

[cpm9ball]

Thank you Marcus. We have all learned so much from you. Please come back when you have more to teach us.

 

Geez, Larry! Why did you have to say that?

 

Chris

[rrantique]

I hope the door doesn't hit him in the on the way out.

[cpm9ball]

I hope the door doesn't hit him in the on the way out.

 

I hope it does!

 

Chris

[RWB]

Well, they fellow has what he feels is an good, innovative idea. It can be very difficult to let go of such things - it's a lot like political views: reason and logic have no effect.

[cpm9ball]

Well, they fellow has what he feels is an good, innovative idea. It can be very difficult to let go of such things - it's a lot like political views: reason and logic have no effect.

 

Sorry, Roger! I have no sympathy for him at all. He made every attempt to throw some sort of demeaning barb at every person who disagreed with him even though they tried to politely explain why his idea wouldn't work.

 

Chris

[Davids5104]

i read the first two pages of posts and understood very little. who won the battle of words so I can join their side...#fairweatherfriend

[World Colonial]

Well, they fellow has what he feels is an good, innovative idea. It can be very difficult to let go of such things - it's a lot like political views: reason and logic have no effect.

 

Sorry, Roger! I have no sympathy for him at all. He made every attempt to throw some sort of demeaning barb at every person who disagreed with him even though they tried to politely explain why his idea wouldn't work.

 

Chris

 

It will "work" as he defined it because a complete record is (theoretically) possible. I don't see that the information has any value, except to those who want to exaggerate the significance of this narrow scarcity, most likely to subsequently dupe some uninformed buyer into paying whatever ridiculous prices he believes these coins should be worth.

[cpm9ball]

Well, they fellow has what he feels is an good, innovative idea. It can be very difficult to let go of such things - it's a lot like political views: reason and logic have no effect.

 

Sorry, Roger! I have no sympathy for him at all. He made every attempt to throw some sort of demeaning barb at every person who disagreed with him even though they tried to politely explain why his idea wouldn't work.

 

Chris

 

It will "work" as he defined it because a complete record is (theoretically) possible. I don't see that the information has any value, except to those who want to exaggerate the significance of this narrow scarcity, most likely to subsequently dupe some uninformed buyer into paying whatever ridiculous prices he believes these coins should be worth.

 

The problem with his cockamamie idea is that he isn't defining the entire population of errors that can exist for any one coin, and trying to do so would be a nightmare. Also, would you like to go back in NGC records to search for every mint error that has already been attributed? What about those that may have been cracked out or crossed to PCGS and never deleted from the NGC Census?

 

Chris

[jom]

 

jom

[World Colonial]

You are correct. No definiton was provided. I was thinking more in terms of the CONECA Glossary I linked in my prior post. I don't know how feasible it is or if this even limits it somewhat, but whether it does or not, i still consider it pointless.

 

The reason I do is because to my knowledge, error rarity is not a particularly meaningful input to those who collect them, just as it isn't with all die varieties. Its what you and Brandon stated earlier; how the coin actually looks and whether collectors find it interesting.

 

The other reason I consider it meaningless is because by definition, I presume all errors are produced randomly and accidentally. Using this as an assumption, this implies that every single error combination is rare or at least somewhat scarce, even if minute differences such as the examples you provided earlier are ignored.

 

If this is correct, then the only motive I can see for this exercise is to exaggerate significance of the scarcity and with it, dupe some uninformed buyer into paying an exorbitant premium as I understood from Brandon's prior post.

[cpm9ball]

You are correct. No definiton was provided. I was thinking more in terms of the CONECA Glossary I linked in my prior post. I don't know how feasible it is or if this even limits it somewhat, but whether it does or not, i still consider it pointless.

 

The reason I do is because to my knowledge, error rarity is not a particularly meaningful input to those who collect them, just as it isn't with all die varieties. Its what you and Brandon stated earlier; how the coin actually looks and whether collectors find it interesting.

 

The other reason I consider it meaningless is because by definition, I presume all errors are produced randomly and accidentally. Using this as an assumption, this implies that every single error combination is rare or at least somewhat scarce, even if minute differences such as the examples you provided earlier are ignored.

 

If this is correct, then the only motive I can see for this exercise is to exaggerate significance of the scarcity and with it, dupe some uninformed buyer into paying an exorbitant premium as I understood from Brandon's prior post.

 

(thumbs u (thumbs u (thumbs u

 

A good case in point is the Kennedy missing the clad layer on my sig line. There are only two known to exist, but that is only because no others have ever been reported.

 

A strikethrough is considered a one-of-a-kind, but that doesn't mean some other piece of foreign debris can't fall onto the same die during the same production run; a 50% off-center strike is considered one-of-a-kind, but that doesn't mean another planchet can't end up getting stuck part way in the coining chamber and end up being a 30% off-center strike. I've seen thousands of various errors in varying denominations, and it would be foolhardy to think that you could classify all of them. The rarity scale would have to be redefined. Don't cha think!

 

Chris

 

[World Colonial]

I don't know how error collectors usually approach this specialty. I also don't know how many there are but suspect the CONECA membership isn't substantially larger (if at all) than EAC or the Bust Half Nut Club and if it is, it certainly doesn't show up in the prices. Regardless, given what you have described and my recent check of the Heritage archives, there aren't enough of them to remotely result in the outcome implied by the OP in his reply to one of my posts.

 

The Heritage archives listed 12,610 error sales as of last week with 94 over $10,000 and three over $100k. This versus 1.7MM for all US coins, 42,000+ over $10,000 and 2033 over $100k. This data should make it obvious that except maybe in isolation, the mainstream collector is not going to pay much higher prices versus today relative to other coins generally.

 

The coin in your signature line, its one I can see a reasonably large number wanting to buy. It isn't required for a "complete" Kennedy set but its a novelty, a nice supplement and actually looks decent. I think likewise of off metal planchets (such as 1964 clad and 1965 silver quarters) and brokage (the two sided obverse or reverse).

 

The rest are mostly oddities but I don't think most collectors consider them visually attractive and as a result, the lopsided proportion are never going to pay "high" prices, regardless of their "rarity".

 

This is what the OP ignores. It isn't the lack of knowledege about their narrow scarcity which accounts for the disproportionately "low" prices given their "rarity". There is no evidence anywhere (and I mean none) that more than an irrelevant number buy "rare" coins at more than nominal prices just because a low number exist. If this were remotely true, then any number of world coins and tokens would also be worth a lot more, including some I own. There is also no reason to believe that publicizing this information is going to make more than a miniscule additional number want them any more later either.

[MLCoins-migration]

 

Who wants to data Marca$$, anyway? Certainly not me!

 

It was taken for granted that you have a thick hide to go along with your thick skull.

 

Chris

 

Chris,

 

Apparently, I can't help you understand what is such a very simple principle. You're not thick headed, just dim witted.

 

Anyway, I just came by to see how many blighted roots have exposed themselves.

 

The issue of incomplete certification population data won't go away simply because you insist on throwing F-Bombs at me.

 

Tic-Toc-Tic-Toc....

 

Marcus

[MLCoins-migration]

 

 

Sorry, Roger! I have no sympathy for him at all. He made every attempt to throw some sort of demeaning barb at every person who disagreed with him even though they tried to politely explain why his idea wouldn't work.

 

Chris

 

Anybody who can stand to read through the morass of harassing responses to my very polite posts will be able to see that Chis etal were the ones who responded with insulting barbs. True, I did reply in kind a few times.

 

Chris, are you remotely capable of telling the truth??

 

Marcus

[MLCoins-migration]

I'm waiting to hear from another major dealer of rare coins; especially, error coins. When I get the "Facts" which Chris claims to be sole heir to, then I will provide a good ballpark estimate of the population size for modern proof error coins, and a link to the dealer's site so you can ask him yourself.

 

The fact that there is a major dealer out there and since you haven't the slightest clue who it is merely strengthens the fact that you are clueless about errors, Marca$$.

 

Chris

 

Chris,

 

There are many so called "MAJOR" (And, please qualify that adjective as it applies to coin dealers) dealers...any one is like one red marble in a swimming pool of thousands of white marbles. Nobody could guess what dealer the collectors Society member was referring to...Are you clairvoyant? I'm not!

 

Give us all a break and stop proving that you are naked of any common sense....I don't know of anyone else, but seems to me that you're em-barr-assing yourself.

 

Marcus

[MLCoins-migration]

 

Okay, smart guy, I know of one major dealer that has at least 8 modern PF Mint errors in his inventory. All of them were struck in different years, and none of them were from 1969. I won't tell you who it is because you know everything.

 

Yes! Brandon is my friend, and no, I don't work for him or NGC.

 

Chris

 

Hey Chris, don't you ever think before you speak?

 

If your friend is a "major dealer", then it would stand to reason that he would have some very rare and expensive coins in his stock, including Proof Error coins. Big time dealers don't place too many run of the mill coins in their display cases.The space in their display cases is prime real estate. So, can you please be so kind as to call your friend, or pay him a visit, and give us mud dwellers information on those 8 coins; ya- know, like the holder description, ohhhhh, I'm not thinking before speaking too, AND THE PRICES, AND THE HOLDER SERIAL NUMBERS? I'd bet I'm not the only mud dweller who'd like to read the online certifications.

 

Marcus

 

Is it necessary to think when speaking to a know-it-all? Does it matter what anyone says?

 

My friend? Major dealer? I didn't say that the two were the same. That's what happens when you make an assumption, Marca$$. It makes an out of you, but not me!

 

Chris

 

Chris,

 

If stand before a room of people and contribute my views on global warming, and I fart loudly, how many people who oppose my arguments will excuse themselves, saying, "The guy farted! The guy farted! That's proof that he's wrong!!!!!

 

Marcus

 

PS...Friend Shmend...you hang the strength of your opposition on that? How many straws do you have to hang onto?

[World Colonial]

The issue of incomplete certification population data won't go away

 

There isn't any "issue". In my nine years here and several years reading PCGS, I have never read any other comment indicating it is a "problem". This indicates that you are one of the few (if not only) collector(s) who believe it is an "issue".

 

The bottom line is that the lopsided proportion of other collectors don't consider this "rarity" significant and your claim is contrary to how most collectors actually act.

[MLCoins-migration]

I don't know how error collectors usually approach this specialty. I also don't know how many there are but suspect the CONECA membership isn't substantially larger (if at all) than EAC or the Bust Half Nut Club and if it is, it certainly doesn't show up in the prices. Regardless, given what you have described and my recent check of the Heritage archives, there aren't enough of them to remotely result in the outcome implied by the OP in his reply to one of my posts.

 

The Heritage archives listed 12,610 error sales as of last week with 94 over $10,000 and three over $100k. This versus 1.7MM for all US coins, 42,000+ over $10,000 and 2033 over $100k. This data should make it obvious that except maybe in isolation, the mainstream collector is not going to pay much higher prices versus today relative to other coins generally.

 

The coin in your signature line, its one I can see a reasonably large number wanting to buy. It isn't required for a "complete" Kennedy set but its a novelty, a nice supplement and actually looks decent. I think likewise of off metal planchets (such as 1964 clad and 1965 silver quarters) and brokage (the two sided obverse or reverse).

 

The rest are mostly oddities but I don't think most collectors consider them visually attractive and as a result, the lopsided proportion are never going to pay "high" prices, regardless of their "rarity".

 

This is what the OP ignores. It isn't the lack of knowledege about their narrow scarcity which accounts for the disproportionately "low" prices given their "rarity". There is no evidence anywhere (and I mean none) that more than an irrelevant number buy "rare" coins at more than nominal prices just because a low number exist. If this were remotely true, then any number of world coins and tokens would also be worth a lot more, including some I own. There is also no reason to believe that publicizing this information is going to make more than a miniscule additional number want them any more later either.

 

 

World Colonial,

 

Thank you! Very well put!

 

However, your argument still begs the question, "when and if a collector of rare coins can validate a specific rare coin's desirability among other collectors, he is currently at a disadvantage when attempting to sell that coin without being able to validate that coin's Census Sub Population. That Sub Population figure should be included in that coin's certification. It really is a small matter to expand the database -script (SQL or other) to include Census sub population data for ALL coins whose holders contain more attribute information than simply MS/PF grades.

 

In fact, there are examples in the Census where varieties have been split from the basic MS/PF herd to form their own Census population. It is presumptuous to declare that Sub Population data is not of sufficient value to warrant it's inclusion into all coin Certifications.

 

Marcus

[MLCoins-migration]

The issue of incomplete certification population data won't go away

 

There isn't any "issue". In my nine years here and several years reading PCGS, I have never read any other comment indicating it is a "problem". This indicates that you are one of the few (if not only) collector(s) who believe it is an "issue".

 

The bottom line is that the lopsided proportion of other collectors don't consider this "rarity" significant and your claim is contrary to how most collectors actually act.

 

World Colonial,

 

Time will tell what the value of this particular rarity is. And the burden is mine to work to that end. And this has little to do with my opening post - It was just an example.

 

More information is soon to come.

 

BTW, thank you for taking the time to offer your input.

 

Marcus

[Hard Times]

I have notified Arch about the abrasive remarks of ML Coins towards various folks here. I suggest others do the same. He should tone it down or be removed.

 

Best, HT Who loves debate on issues but not personal attacks

[World Colonial]

I'm not trying to pick on you. What I am telling you is that your thinking is contrary to the way most collectors approach collecting both in the past and today.

 

What I see in your posts on this topic is an expression of your personal preference and nothing more. Earlier, I raised some specific points explaining why practically all other collectors don't see this subject as you do. I also asked why more than a minimal number should agree with you later. You didn't answer and I presume the reason you did not is because you don't have any specifics.

 

If you read the historical commentary on this forum (and PCGS), there have been a few instances where someone has advocated a particular series or segment they prefer. In the last year or so, this included US and world moderns generically, Ike dollars, Washington quarters, FDR dimes and now you with errors.

 

These segments and series have been at or near the bottom of the preference scale the entire time I have been collecting (off and on since 1975) and to my knowledge, from the time these coins were issued.

 

What I am telling you and told these other advocates is that this isn't an accident or an aberration. Its apparent that IN THE AGGREGATE, the attributes these coins posses are not those which most collectors prefer, whether now or in the past. I have also yet to see anyone provide a reason anywhere explaining why any of these series will increase noticeably in popularity as measured by the price level. The evidence bears this out, whether those who favor these coins like it or not.

 

You didn't provide any specifics, but have you even considered given the variety in this specialty (as in tens of thousands of error combinations) how much the collector base and future preferences for errors in general will have to change to result in the outcome you imply?

 

For economic reasons alone, I see no reason to believe that collecting is going to grow substantially in the US where this is remotely going to happen.

[Afterword]

Marcus;

 

Perhaps if you prove there is a substantial demand that will justify the TPGs time and expense, you might have a better chance of achieving your objective. Rent a table at one of the larger coin shows and try to solicit as many signatures as possible to demonstrate that demand, or absence thereof, by way of petition.

 

You are achieving nothing here that will serve your end.

 

 

[jom]

[it is presumptuous to declare that Sub Population data is not of sufficient value to warrant it's inclusion into all coin Certifications.

 

Since it is clear that you are, at best, one of only a handful of people that care about this I would argue it is presumptuous of YOU to declare that this Sub Pop data is of sufficient value for the TPGs to include them.

 

jom

 

 

[cpm9ball]

 

Okay, smart guy, I know of one major dealer that has at least 8 modern PF Mint errors in his inventory. All of them were struck in different years, and none of them were from 1969. I won't tell you who it is because you know everything.

 

Yes! Brandon is my friend, and no, I don't work for him or NGC.

 

Chris

 

Hey Chris, don't you ever think before you speak?

 

If your friend is a "major dealer", then it would stand to reason that he would have some very rare and expensive coins in his stock, including Proof Error coins. Big time dealers don't place too many run of the mill coins in their display cases.The space in their display cases is prime real estate. So, can you please be so kind as to call your friend, or pay him a visit, and give us mud dwellers information on those 8 coins; ya- know, like the holder description, ohhhhh, I'm not thinking before speaking too, AND THE PRICES, AND THE HOLDER SERIAL NUMBERS? I'd bet I'm not the only mud dweller who'd like to read the online certifications.

 

Marcus

 

Is it necessary to think when speaking to a know-it-all? Does it matter what anyone says?

 

My friend? Major dealer? I didn't say that the two were the same. That's what happens when you make an assumption, Marca$$. It makes an out of you, but not me!

 

Chris

 

Chris,

 

If stand before a room of people and contribute my views on global warming, and I fart loudly, how many people who oppose my arguments will excuse themselves, saying, "The guy farted! The guy farted! That's proof that he's wrong!!!!!

 

Marcus

 

PS...Friend Shmend...you hang the strength of your opposition on that? How many straws do you have to hang onto?

 

Hey, Marca$$! I see you've been gone for more than a week. What? You still can't find that major dealer? I'll give you a hint. I never said he is my friend. That was your assumption. I told you that before, and you keep making an out of you but not me.

 

You know, what I really don't get about this insistence of yours to have errors attributed in the Census is why you haven't posted this on "Ask NGC"? Are you afraid that they will turn you down, and you will have to resort to calling them names?

 

Chris

[MLCoins-migration]

Marcus;

 

Perhaps if you prove there is a substantial demand that will justify the TPGs time and expense, you might have a better chance of achieving your objective. Rent a table at one of the larger coin shows and try to solicit as many signatures as possible to demonstrate that demand, or absence thereof, by way of petition.

 

You are achieving nothing here that will serve your end.

 

 

Afterword,

 

I am a database analyst and mathematician. The expense would be very small in proportion to the number of NGC members it would benefit.

 

Thanks for your input,

 

Marcus

[PaulS.]

NGC has no intention of including error coins in the census numbers for a number of reasons which need not be explained. This thread has deteriorated into name-calling and personal attacks and therefore I am shutting it down.

 

 

-Paul