CACG & CAC: Price And Grading Trends 1 1

[World Colonial]

On 12/18/2023 at 1:49 PM, zadok said:

...there r many influences on this current trend...dealers incentives, customers preferences, perceptions on graders, lag times, premiums on sales, registry sets on n on...but there is one factor we do not have access to that mite indicate the real story...crossovers, which way is this tide moving??....

South African based collectors prefer NGC by a substantial margin, as evidenced by the relative number graded (they buy most of it) and volume of listings on their version of eBay.

There are a few pillars I have seen crossed by PCGS forum members from NGC holders.  Not sure why they did this, as there certainly is no consistently higher premium that I can see since there isn't even enough data to conclude.

The 1765 Peru 4R MS-62 in both pop reports is the same coin.  So is my 1759 MS-63 Peru 2R.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 7:59 PM, VKurtB said:

This is undeniable truth: over time, JA has said things which seem to be incompatible. That means one of three things are true. 1) the early things he said were incorrectly understood, 2) the more recent things he said are incorrectly misunderstood, or 3) JA moves male bovines by common carrier, i.e. he is a bull shipper. Maybe all three are true. Given what I see in the numismatic hobby writ large, the 3rd choice becomes the “leader in the clubhouse”. What do all FOUR phases have in common? C’mon everybody, you know. Each phase; his NGC, his PCGS, his sticker business, and the CACG service phase, all have something in common, the financial enrichment of JA. Think!

Reminds me of something that Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, once said: "If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said."  

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/31/2023 at 11:55 AM, Henri Charriere said:

Absolutely correct.  Correctamundo.

But do not quote me for attribution on this!  

OK, I'll quote Arthur Fonzarelli instead....

[World Colonial]

On 12/31/2023 at 6:12 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I'd personally rather debate an occasisionally misgraded slider by the TPGs....or a coin over or undergraded by 1-2 grades...or a questionable Details grade.....then have novices buying coins at prices 5-15 grades too high as was done in the 1960's and 1970's and early-180's. 

It's primarily a problem due to the financialization of collecting which created the higher price level.

When the price level was primarily the result of actual collecting and not financially motivated buying, the quality differences you describe were less important or not important at all.  Same for fakes, as this is substantially also mostly the result of the much higher price level.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/30/2023 at 7:59 PM, VKurtB said:

Each phase; his NGC, his PCGS, his sticker business, and the CACG service phase, all have something in common, the financial enrichment of JA. Think!

Nothing wrong with making money, so long as legal and not besmirching one's past dealings.

At his age, with plenty of $$$ made over the decades, I don't think JA or CACG are doing whatever they hope to do just to make MORE money than they could have just by opening up JA Numismatics or something like that.  That would have been much easier to do....less CAPX....less headaches over time....probably better profit margins.

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/31/2023 at 6:08 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

....I'm a bit confused as to what happened here.  It seems you are saying you got treated OK -- that an overgraded coin's cost was refunded to you -- but then you segue into shenanigans ?  Can you or someone explain this for a novice as I was never good with the re-submission thing.  Thanks ! 

I will be happy to, but will do so privately.  

[VKurtB]

On 12/31/2023 at 5:23 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Nothing wrong with making money, so long as legal and not besmirching one's past dealings.

At his age, with plenty of $$$ made over the decades, I don't think JA or CACG are doing whatever they hope to do just to make MORE money than they could have just by opening up JA Numismatics or something like that.  That would have been much easier to do....less CAPX....less headaches over time....probably better profit margins.

Or perhaps JA could semi-retire and attempt to teach Laura Sperber how to spell. 

[Coinbuf]

On 12/31/2023 at 4:16 PM, World Colonial said:

 

There are a few pillars I have seen crossed by PCGS forum members from NGC holders.  Not sure why they did this, as there certainly is no consistently higher premium that I can see since there isn't even enough data to conclude.

 

My guess would be for registry reasons, PCGS registry only accepts PCGS graded coins.   If world registry sets become the new hot thing to do for PCGS registry collectors, then you are only seeing the tip of the iceberg on world coin crossovers.

[VKurtB]

On 12/31/2023 at 5:20 PM, World Colonial said:

financialization of collecting

This scourge has largely dissipated, but it still has a smidgeon or two to go. 

[VKurtB]

On 12/31/2023 at 10:55 AM, zadok said:

...im going to start looking for all the "D" coins, vastly overgraded coins in tpg holders....

I assume you’re not talking about “basement slabbers”.

[VKurtB]

On 12/31/2023 at 5:08 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

 But we DO have formal, in-writing standards from the ANA's 7th Edition, right ?

Yes but, ONLY IF YOU READ AND COMPREHEND THE ENTIRE VOLUME as a whole. Every word is equally important. If you obsess on merely the technical definitions, you are leaving waaaaaaaay too much wisdom on the table. Oh, BTW, the ANA has NOTHING to do with that volume. It’s merely an empty “official” status, like NGC being the official grading company. It’s a royalty thing. The ANA does NOT approve even a single word of it. 

[VKurtB]

On 12/31/2023 at 5:12 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

I am sympathetic to what you are saying, Kurt, but if this hobby is not going to be dominated by dealers and savvy, knowledgeable collectors (like yourself and many of the posters here)....then it's going to be the Sharks vs. The Guppies as it was pre-TPG. 

I'd personally rather debate an occasisionally misgraded slider by the TPGs....or a coin over or undergraded by 1-2 grades...or a questionable Details grade.....then have novices buying coins at prices 5-15 grades too high as was done in the 1960's and 1970's and early-180's. 

Yes! The Sharks like it the way it was, and won’t stop until it is that way again. They don’t even require tartar sauce with their guppy meal. Since the dawn of numismatic time, those with superior knowledge, and guile, have supped on those with inferior knowledge. That is the ONE AND ONLY “consistency” this hobby will allow. 

Edited January 1 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/31/2023 at 11:55 AM, zadok said:

...im going to start looking for all the "D" coins, vastly overgraded coins in tpg holders....

From what I read in the Maurice Rosen and similar interviews, they weren't that plentiful...it was the preponderance of "C" coins in dealer inventories while the "A" and "B" coins in investors/collectors hands that caused the pricing anomaly.

The dealers were able to charge "A" and "B" prices for "C" coins -- for a while at least -- and buyers got burned when the market turned despite what the grade on the holder said.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/31/2023 at 12:45 PM, Coinbuf said:

Laura at Legend is a prime example of this, she has been a PCGS or nothing dealer for as long as I can remember, but now she is pushing that everyone should cross all those coins into CACG holders.

That's unreal.

On 12/31/2023 at 12:45 PM, Coinbuf said:

It is important to remember that she is one of the investors at CACG.

That's unethical, IMO, even if disclosed.  

I assumed JA and maybe CAC employees owned 100% of CACG.  Didn't know outside investors were solicited and accepted.

Do we have any idea of how many graders are at CACG and what volume they can do in a year (or now) compared to PCGS/NGC ?  Has JA said he wants to be as big as them, or is he happy with a niche service catering to classic coins (not moderns) and the total volume much lower ?

Edited January 1 by GoldFinger1969

[VKurtB]

On 12/31/2023 at 5:15 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Are you talking about the creation of CAC in 2008 ?

What moves a man to create something, abandon it, create something else, then abandon it also, create yet a third thing, describe what it will never be, then make it precisely that? Sounds a little like a deadbeat dad or a megalomaniac to me. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/31/2023 at 6:46 PM, Coinbuf said:

My guess would be for registry reasons, PCGS registry only accepts PCGS graded coins.   If world registry sets become the new hot thing to do for PCGS registry collectors, then you are only seeing the tip of the iceberg on world coin crossovers.

Even if, unlike with U.S. coins, NGC has dominant market share in foreign/world coins and theirs sell at a premium ?

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/31/2023 at 8:22 PM, VKurtB said:

What moves a man to create something, abandon it, create something else, then abandon it also, create yet a third thing, describe what it will never be, then make it precisely that? Sounds a little like a deadbeat dad or a megalomaniac to me. 

Or former basketball coach Larry "Out Of Town" Brown !! 

I do believe that JA said that once CAC had gotten most of the classic coins reviewed/stickered, market-making would be their prime focus since they wouldn't be CAC-ing moderns or foreign coins.  By now, most of the low-hanging CAC fruit from NGC or PCGS has probably been plucked.

[VKurtB]

On 12/31/2023 at 7:56 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Or former basketball coach Larry "Out Of Town" Brown !! 

I do believe that JA said that once CAC had gotten most of the classic coins reviewed/stickered, market-making would be their prime focus since they wouldn't be CAC-ing moderns or foreign coins.  By now, most of the low-hanging CAC fruit from NGC or PCGS has probably been plucked.

Thought experiment. Let’s take a subset of the major show circuit dealer network, say the upper crust. Let’s say the dealers who set up at the IMEX show in Nashville in September. Would they believe that most of the classic coins that are worthy of slabbing or stickering have already been seen by The Big Two plus CAC? I believe they would, because they are an incestuous group of dealers who keep circulating the same slabs round and round. Now, what would a central Pennsylvania backwoods auction denizen believe/know? Yes, that there are gazillions of fresh to the market raw coins out there! Why? They SEE THEM nearly weekly. Only the relatively meager budgets of the auction attendees keep the prices down. Why don’t the owners of the coins sell them online? They don’t TRUST online anything. Many have no useable Internet service in the hills of Pennsylvania, and CERTAINLY no wireless service. There is one auction house in York County, about 8 miles north of the Maryland line that has no wireless, no cable, no dialup, nothing. Not even GPS works there. The hills are smallish but the valleys are deeeeeep. You are victims of the circles in which you travel, and not everywhere is like anywhere else. You have to go where the coins are, and the demand is not.

[World Colonial]

On 12/31/2023 at 8:53 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Even if, unlike with U.S. coins, NGC has dominant market share in foreign/world coins and theirs sell at a premium ?

I don't think either service consistently sells at a premium over the other.  Too few grading events to compare 99%+ of the time too.

[Coinbuf]

On 12/31/2023 at 6:14 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

That's unreal.

That's unethical, IMO, even if disclosed.  

I assumed JA and maybe CAC employees owned 100% of CACG.  Didn't know outside investors were solicited and accepted.

Do we have any idea of how many graders are at CACG and what volume they can do in a year (or now) compared to PCGS/NGC ?  Has JA said he wants to be as big as them, or is he happy with a niche service catering to classic coins (not moderns) and the total volume much lower ?

The hobby/business of numismatics is fraught with what many would consider unethical behavior, almost as bad as politics and politicians.

I only know a handful of names of the CACG investors, but as I recall there were 150 in total.   These were the individuals and/or companies that were allowed to submit to CACG for a few months prior to the authorized CAC members both dealers and collectors (like myself) being allowed to submit to CACG.

I do not know how many graders in total and only know the names of two, both were graders at other TPG's prior to working for CACG.   JA has been very clear that his goal is not to be as big or do the grading volume that N or P do.   That doesn't preclude that from happening down the road, just that it is not the goal at this time.   And to correct you (once again) CACG does grade moderns.

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 12/31/2023 at 6:01 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Apparently, many coins are coming back as Details-like coins with no grade after getting pretty good grades with additional scoring like "RD" or "RB". 

Or at least that's the early results from the videos being posted.

From what I've seen and read a majority of coins crossed at any grade have been downgraded or returned as a "details" coin, but as I previously mentioned if those coins didn't previously have a CAC bean on them those are the results they should have expected unless the submitters have a superb understanding of grading and what CACG is looking for in coins and can cherry pick PCGS and NGC slabs.

I also read that CACG was labeling some coins with an "L" to signify that they were previously graded by NGC? I'm not entirely sure what that's all about, or if I'm correct, as I didn't see a clear explanation of it. Maybe @Coinbuf knows something about it. 

Just what you need right, , A, B, C, & L coins. 

Edited January 1 by Fenntucky Mike

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 12/31/2023 at 6:07 PM, World Colonial said:

I mostly own NGC coins, somewhat by default.  But for pillar coinage and South Africa (Union and ZAR), I have seen a higher proportion of better quality for the grade coins.  Concurrently, NGC has graded a lot more of both.

 

On 12/31/2023 at 6:11 PM, World Colonial said:

NGC won the grading for the Emilio Ortiz collection of Latin American 1/4R, 422 lots.  Conversely, Pat Johnson's collection sold last year was PCGS.

If PCGS can get their registry set act together, which they haven't the last time I looked, there are enough PCGS fanboys and dealers to pull some of the higher end and better quality pieces away from NGC. I don't believe that PCGS will ever catch NGC in quantity of world slabs but they could catch up with them on the higher end pieces. If that happens then NGC would have dropped the ball by not catering more to world coins in the way of variety attribution, registry set construction, etc., not that PCGS is doing that or that it would be worth NGC's time to do so, but if NGC wants to nip any potential move by PCGS in world coins in the bud then that would be one way. 

For lower value world coins, < $300, NGC coins do sell at a modest premium, once you get over that $300 threshold the difference is typically negligible with a few exceptions. I believe that has more to do with registry set construction and NCLT coins. I've been seeing a lot of Irish coins in PCGS plastic, still am, as well as Rhodesian and Guatemalan coins to a lesser extent fwiw.

Edited January 1 by Fenntucky Mike
Grammar

[DeplorableDan]

On 1/1/2024 at 8:16 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

From what I've seen and read a majority of coins crossed at any grade have been downgraded or returned as a "details" coin, but as I previously mentioned if those coins didn't previously have a CAC bean on them those are the results they should have expected unless the submitters have a superb understanding of grading and what CACG is looking for in coins and can cherry pick PCGS and NGC slabs.

I also read that CACG was labeling some coins with an "L" to signify that they were previously graded by NGC? I'm not entirely sure what that's all about, or if I'm correct, as I didn't see a clear explanation of it. Maybe @Coinbuf knows something about it. 

Just what you need right, , A, B, C, & L coins. 

The "L" (Legacy) signifies any previously stickered coin, PCGS or NGC, that was crossed directly from its previous holder to CACG. Since most have not submitted many PCGS/CAC coins for crossover, many assume the early legacy coins will be predominantly NGC crossovers. The purpose of the designation was more or less a safeguard against gradeflation.

[zadok]

On 12/31/2023 at 8:56 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Or former basketball coach Larry "Out Of Town" Brown !! 

I do believe that JA said that once CAC had gotten most of the classic coins reviewed/stickered, market-making would be their prime focus since they wouldn't be CAC-ing moderns or foreign coins.  By now, most of the low-hanging CAC fruit from NGC or PCGS has probably been plucked.

...u keep plucking the wrong turkey, also trees dont have feathers usually, CAC did not do foreign nor ancients n as we have discussed numerous times, certified coins r only a minority % of the coins out there...many of the high hanging fruit will never be certified nor CAC'd for obvious reasons...additionally, crossovers between NGC n PCGS has territorial issues, also as discussed, crossovers to CACG is TBD....

[zadok]

On 1/1/2024 at 8:16 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

From what I've seen and read a majority of coins crossed at any grade have been downgraded or returned as a "details" coin, but as I previously mentioned if those coins didn't previously have a CAC bean on them those are the results they should have expected unless the submitters have a superb understanding of grading and what CACG is looking for in coins and can cherry pick PCGS and NGC slabs.

I also read that CACG was labeling some coins with an "L" to signify that they were previously graded by NGC? I'm not entirely sure what that's all about, or if I'm correct, as I didn't see a clear explanation of it. Maybe @Coinbuf knows something about it. 

Just what you need right, , A, B, C, & L coins. 

...im waiting for the "Z" coins....

[Coinbuf]

On 1/1/2024 at 6:16 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

From what I've seen and read a majority of coins crossed at any grade have been downgraded or returned as a "details" coin, but as I previously mentioned if those coins didn't previously have a CAC bean on them those are the results they should have expected unless the submitters have a superb understanding of grading and what CACG is looking for in coins and can cherry pick PCGS and NGC slabs.

I also read that CACG was labeling some coins with an "L" to signify that they were previously graded by NGC? I'm not entirely sure what that's all about, or if I'm correct, as I didn't see a clear explanation of it. Maybe @Coinbuf knows something about it. 

Just what you need right, , A, B, C, & L coins. 

As Dan already replied the L is for legacy and could be either a previously beaned N or P graded coin.   I think what you have been reading are reports and thoughts that so far fewer PCGS beaned coins have been crossed over to CACG holders vs a higher number of NGC beaned coins.   Only CACG has the true answer to this, but there are some, especially on the social media sites, that are pushing this narrative.   This is causing an unnecessary reaction and a possible emotional reaction to devalue the CACG "L" designated coins.    I think it's an irrational fear reaction from those PCGS only collectors that are concerned that their PCGS only collections will have the values significantly reduced.   During the initial debate over the use of the L on the CAC forum it was clear that PCGS collectors were very worried that having NGC coins crossed and mixed with their PCGS crossed coins would dilute the value of their coins.   Several wanted the L to be LN or LP to designate the former TPG, the fear is that great for some.   I also think that is part of why we are seeing some of the hesitancy on the part of PCGS only collectors to cross PCGS coins that have a bean.

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 1/1/2024 at 1:25 PM, Coinbuf said:

As Dan already replied the L is for legacy and could be either a previously beaned N or P graded coin.

So the L is only for beaned coins that are crossed over and not all crossovers?

On 1/1/2024 at 1:25 PM, Coinbuf said:

I think what you have been reading are reports and thoughts that so far fewer PCGS beaned coins have been crossed over to CACG holders vs a higher number of NGC beaned coins.   Only CACG has the true answer to this, but there are some, especially on the social media sites, that are pushing this narrative.   This is causing an unnecessary reaction and a possible emotional reaction to devalue the CACG "L" designated coins.

If I'm understanding this correctly it just seems silly, why would the perception of more NGC CAC coins being crossed to CACG devalue "L" coins? Because they were in NGC plastic? They were beaned people.  If they truly believe that CACG is better, that the CAC bean matters, and that CACG coins are going to bring in premiums over NGC & PCGS then it shouldn't matter. They should also have some comfort in the distinct possibility that the coins will cross back to PCGS or NGC at the same grade, maybe even higher. It doesn't hurt to wait and see though.

On 1/1/2024 at 1:25 PM, Coinbuf said:

I think it's an irrational fear reaction from those PCGS only collectors that are concerned that their PCGS only collections will have the values significantly reduced.   During the initial debate over the use of the L on the CAC forum it was clear that PCGS collectors were very worried that having NGC coins crossed and mixed with their PCGS crossed coins would dilute the value of their coins.   Several wanted the L to be LN or LP to designate the former TPG, the fear is that great for some.   I also think that is part of why we are seeing some of the hesitancy on the part of PCGS only collectors to cross PCGS coins that have a bean.

I think people should be cautious, especially when crossing coins to CACG that don't have a bean, and be concerned that a coin's value could drop but not because of combining NGC and PCGS beaned coins into CACG-L coins but of the majority of the market rejecting CACG due to stricter grading. It'll be interesting to see how the vintage, non CAC, coins are handled by CACG as compared to the more modern ones, will they be more lenient on cabinet rub or a wipe with more crossing? 

Interesting about Laura being an investor in CACG and then deciding to close LRCA. CACG lost a platform as did Laura, I don't know that it really hurts CACG in anyway but it's interesting that she decided to shut LRCA down and pass up the opportunity to advertise CACG.

[DeplorableDan]

On 1/1/2024 at 4:35 PM, Fenntucky Mike said:

So the L is only for beaned coins that are crossed over and not all crossovers?

Yes.

On 1/1/2024 at 4:35 PM, Fenntucky Mike said:

If I'm understanding this correctly it just seems silly, why would the perception of more NGC CAC coins being crossed to CACG devalue "L" coins? Because they were in NGC plastic? They were beaned people.  If they truly believe that CACG is better, that the CAC bean matters, and that CACG coins are going to bring in premiums over NGC & PCGS then it shouldn't matter. They should also have some comfort in the distinct possibility that the coins will cross back to PCGS or NGC at the same grade, maybe even higher. It doesn't hurt to wait and see though.

It may sound silly, but PCAC selling for more money then NCAC also sounds silly, yet that is the harsh reality of the coin market. Its not only the fact that the coins originated from NGC plastic, its that many believe CAC/CACG is actually a bit tighter now than they were in the past. If that were true, it would mean that the coins without the "L" might have been graded to a sticter standard then some of the crossovers. As @Coinbuf stated, this is an irrational knee-jerk reaction and its very early to be drawing conclusions. It's mostly speculation and hearsay, and will probably just take some time for things to shake out. Also, a coin with a legacy designation is no more likely to cross back to PCGS/NGC than any other coins that CACG grades, the fresh coins graded by CACG are just as likely to cross.

On 1/1/2024 at 4:35 PM, Fenntucky Mike said:

I think people should be cautious, especially when crossing coins to CACG that don't have a bean, and be concerned that a coin's value could drop but not because of combining NGC and PCGS beaned coins into CACG-L coins but of the majority of the market rejecting CACG due to stricter grading. It'll be interesting to see how the vintage, non CAC, coins are handled by CACG as compared to the more modern ones, will they be more lenient on cabinet rub or a wipe with more crossing? 

Interesting about Laura being an investor in CACG and then deciding to close LRCA. CACG lost a platform as did Laura, I don't know that it really hurts CACG in anyway but it's interesting that she decided to shut LRCA down and pass up the opportunity to advertise CACG.

Some non cac coins actually are crossing at grade, albeit a very small percentage. Many others are being detailed and downgraded. They have very little tolerance for rub/friction, scratches, wipes, or any other surface issue you can think of. You could send in 10 random unstickered coins from both services and theres a decent chance that the majority come back deets for one reason or another. As time goes on, we can start to get a better feel but initially its been quite a shock to the market and subsequently some dealers have been rabbling. 

Laura will still be pushing CACG through Legend Numismatics, though she has implored CACG to get on the ball with marketing and the registry. Evidently all of her top set collectors are still fixated on PCGS/CAC. 

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 1/1/2024 at 5:34 PM, DeplorableDan said:

It may sound silly, but PCAC selling for more money then NCAC also sounds silly, yet that is the harsh reality of the coin market.

It's silly but less so as people have preferred plastic, not that that makes sense either, but once they cross to CACG-L there is no way to tell as far as I know. 

On 1/1/2024 at 5:34 PM, DeplorableDan said:

Its not only the fact that the coins originated from NGC plastic, its that many believe CAC/CACG is actually a bit tighter now than they were in the past. If that were true, it would mean that the coins without the "L" might have been graded to a sticter standard then some of the crossovers.

If they are giving "L" coins a pass and grading everything else tighter that would be a problem, but as you say there is not enough data to speculate on at this point. 

On 1/1/2024 at 5:34 PM, DeplorableDan said:

Also, a coin with a legacy designation is no more likely to cross back to PCGS/NGC than any other coins that CACG grades, the fresh coins graded by CACG are just as likely to cross.

If a CACG-L coin is no more likely to cross back to PCGS or NGC at the same grade then was CAC wrong to bean it? Shouldn't a beaned coin be strong for the grade and more likely to cross back being market graded? Do you think that opinions can be that varied for the same coin on a consistent basis? If CACG is grading more tightly than compared to PCGS or NGC then those coins, regular CACG coins, should stand a good chance at crossing or maybe even bumping up a grade. Hypothetically that is. 

On 1/1/2024 at 5:34 PM, DeplorableDan said:

Laura will still be pushing CACG through Legend Numismatics, though she has implored CACG to get on the ball with marketing and the registry. Evidently all of her top set collectors are still fixated on PCGS/CAC.

Yeah, CACG will need to get a registry going ASAP if they hope to compete or gain a foothold in the market, even then it will be interesting to see how many collectors will be willing to cough up the $'s to crossover or start buying CACG slabs in qty for registry sets. Actually, now that I think about it I'm not sure that having a registry would be a big draw at this point, seems like people are shifting to wait and see mode.  MyCollect had a registry set up from the start if I remember correctly and it's dead as a doornail over there from what I see. 

It'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out in a couple of years. 

Edited January 1 by Fenntucky Mike
Words

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/31/2023 at 9:24 PM, VKurtB said:

Yes, that there are gazillions of fresh to the market raw coins out there! Why? They SEE THEM nearly weekly. Only the relatively meager budgets of the auction attendees keep the prices down. Why don’t the owners of the coins sell them online? They don’t TRUST online anything. Many have no useable Internet service in the hills of Pennsylvania, and CERTAINLY no wireless service. There is one auction house in York County, about 8 miles north of the Maryland line that has no wireless, no cable, no dialup, nothing. Not even GPS works there. The hills are smallish but the valleys are deeeeeep. You are victims of the circles in which you travel, and not everywhere is like anywhere else. You have to go where the coins are, and the demand is not.

Can you give us an idea of the specifics of the coin TYPES and the coin NUMBERS ?  

Just because you are seeing hundreds or even thousands of raw coins for a series type doesn't mean it will make a dent in a population census that are millions or tens of millions (Saints and Morgans, to use 2 examples).

I don't doubt that you have found a nice niche that suits your needs.  But as much as I would WANT TO BELIEVE that there lots of quality raw Mint State-quality or high AU-quality coins that can add to the TPG certifieds....I doubt it.

If I'm wrong, and there are tens of thousands of hoards out there hitting the market, I think we would have heard about it.