How much information do you require before you make a decision to buy a coin? 1 1

[zadok]

On 1/23/2024 at 11:49 AM, VKurtB said:

So then was the rarity incorrect before? Seems so to me. But then, since rarity is determined by what the TPGS has seen, and my deeply held belief that their pop reports aren’t worth the electrons used to produce them, the whole idea is “horse hockey”.

...not necessarily...rarity is a dynamic measurement, its based on known examples, which can change...pop reports r based on whats been seen/submitted n is also dynamic n constantly changes, but gives the viewer a reference point by which to make determinations on availability...no one really ever knows how many of a given coin is still out there, numbers can change at any time...if after, lets say 100 years, only X number of coins have ever shown up then thats a very strong reference point, barring a mini hoard showing up, of that coins availability...i have often attempted to purchase the majority of several "rarities" , 3 of 5, 1 of 4, 6 of 7, to just see what impact/influence i could exercise on the market in those areas, its been quite satisfying on many diff levels, n in two of those the coins have never shown up in any of the tpgs pop reports to date, read into that whatever one chooses....

[zadok]

On 1/23/2024 at 11:40 AM, Henri Charriere said:

True. I lost a top pop recently when an MS-67 ➕️ was certified.  If an MS68 is certified and added to a Set Registry, the "current finest possible set rating" changes accordingly.

🐓:  It's amazing what you can learn from someone who knows what he's talking about...

Q.A.:  ... hence the honorarium, The Great z. 

...a certified ms68 doesnt have to be added to a set to change the possible set rating, it just has to be certified n can sit dormant, just the possibilty of it being added changes the possible set rating....

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/23/2024 at 11:49 AM, VKurtB said:

So then was the rarity incorrect before? ....

No. Let me put it this way. Rarity is fluid.  I forget the coin, but it was unique... that is, until several thousand were recovered from a wreck in the 1770's.  Rarity?  Pfft!

Grade scarcity is what I have to contend with. With every certification, the value of my high Mint State grades is affected.  Lately, some of my Roosters have lost their grade scarcity.   Not much I can do about it.  

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/23/2024 at 12:28 PM, zadok said:

...a certified ms68 doesnt have to be added to a set to change the possible set rating, it just has to be certified n can sit dormant, just the possibilty of it being added changes the possible set rating....

True.  That is correct.  

[VKurtB]

On 1/23/2024 at 12:13 PM, Henri Charriere said:

No. Let me put it this way. Rarity is fluid.  I forget the coin, but it was unique... that is, until several thousand were recovered from a wreck in the 1770's.  Rarity?  Pfft!

Grade scarcity is what I have to contend with. With every certification, the value of my high Mint State grades is affected.  Lately, some of my Roosters have lost their grade scarcity.   Not much I can do about it.  

The ANA’s standards for judging rarity in exhibits completely ignore grade scarcity. Rarity is rarity, whether the pieces are PO1 or MS67+.

[RWB]

On 1/24/2024 at 12:05 AM, VKurtB said:

The ANA’s standards for judging rarity in exhibits completely ignore grade scarcity. Rarity is rarity, whether the pieces are PO1 or MS67+.

Makes good sense.

The register set nonsense is based on money and greed; largely ignoring real numismatics.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/24/2024 at 12:05 AM, VKurtB said:

The ANA’s standards for judging rarity in exhibits completely ignore grade scarcity. Rarity is rarity, whether the pieces are PO1 or MS67+.

So they go by total population census then ? 

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/24/2024 at 10:55 AM, RWB said:

Makes good sense.

The register set nonsense is based on money and greed; largely ignoring real numismatics.

For the record, and with the OP's indulgence, I hold NGC completely harmless in any activity I choose to engage in knowingly and voluntarily in the absence of coercion and duress, physical or psychological. I attribute my participation in a Set Registry as merely one manifestation of mental disease or defect, no different from those who obsessively and compulsively collected baseball cards (buying boxes of cards to snag the few elusive ones) glass Coca-Cola bottles from each and every bottling plant, or any other collectible, in its entirety. Why would anyone risk his life to seek to climb the tallest peaks on every continent?  One of the more interesting studies I have read was written by a psychiatrist who advanced a theory as to why one gentleman's urge to remove classified gov't files had, as its likely basis, experiences dating from his childhood....  Some people, and "collectors" generally find the impulse to assemble unto completion, simply irresistible.  Money and greed do not figure into the equation and, if they do, are incidental and coincidental. My advice: collect with your head, not over it.

Moderation:  Feel free to delete as you see fit.  

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/23/2024 at 12:28 PM, zadok said:

...a certified ms68 doesnt have to be added to a set to change the possible set rating, it just has to be certified n can sit dormant, just the possibilty of it being added changes the possible set rating....

If I may, I should like to add one salient observation.  I have not for one moment ever believed the accuracy of a formal census or population count relies on a member's return of a dethroned encapsulation's data insert.  (Am I to believe this simple act of courteous reciprocity between TPGS, essential to accurate record-keeping, is left to the whims of their respective members?)  I have never received such inserts accompanied by a polite but firm order directing the return of such bric-a-brac.  I, for one, ain't buyin' it.  But I digress...  Salient observation:  I believe, when a coin is "decertified" by a TPGS following a formal cross-grading exercise, it also follows that its "current finest possible [registry] set rating" is revised downward. If I am wrong, I shall adopt your words of wisdom in reply as gospel truth.  

[VKurtB]

On 1/24/2024 at 11:57 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

So they go by total population census then ? 

Frequently total mintage, based on the idea that unless there has been a documented melting, all coins are somewhere. 

[VKurtB]

On 1/24/2024 at 9:55 AM, RWB said:

The register set nonsense is based on money and greed;

Absolutely true. 

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/24/2024 at 9:54 PM, VKurtB said:

Absolutely true. 

🐓 :   Sheesh!

[zadok]

On 1/24/2024 at 8:32 PM, Henri Charriere said:

If I may, I should like to add one salient observation.  I have not for one moment ever believed the accuracy of a formal census or population count relies on a member's return of a dethroned encapsulation's data insert.  (Am I to believe this simple act of courteous reciprocity between TPGS, essential to accurate record-keeping, is left to the whims of their respective members?)  I have never received such inserts accompanied by a polite but firm order directing the return of such bric-a-brac.  I, for one, ain't buyin' it.  But I digress...  Salient observation:  I believe, when a coin is "decertified" by a TPGS following a formal cross-grading exercise, it also follows that its "current finest possible [registry] set rating" is revised downward. If I am wrong, I shall adopt your words of wisdom in reply as gospel truth.  

...salient is a big boy word, does not apply here...ur "point of reservation" is weakly admissible, cross-over does not "decertify" anything...the coin is simply removed from that current pool...under normal circumstances the original tpgs label is returned to the owner with the crossed-over coin, it is still available n can be re-submitted to the original tpgs for "recertification" at anytime, assuming its still in its original condition...the potential registry set rating remains unaffected....

[zadok]

On 1/24/2024 at 12:57 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

So they go by total population census then ? 

...rarity is based upon availability, nothing more nothing less....

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/25/2024 at 2:14 PM, zadok said:

...salient is a big boy word, does not apply here...ur "point of reservation" is weakly admissible, cross-over does not "decertify" anything...the coin is simply removed from that current pool...under normal circumstances the original tpgs label is returned to the owner with the crossed-over coin, it is still available n can be re-submitted to the original tpgs for "recertification" at anytime, assuming its still in its original condition...the potential registry set rating remains unaffected....

Ordinarily, I would not dignify a response to ill-informed doggerel spouted by a junk dealer whose forte is scap metal, but a cogent retort is all but required.  Consider this:  an encapsulated coin is removed from its holder, thereby losing its certification, its position on a census of certified coins and a Set Registry -- and the poseur has the unmitigated, colossal gall to insist that, having compromised the integrity of its vaunted status, has NOT been decertified, because, after all, it can always be resubmitted. Really! Balderdash!  It reverts to being a raw coin. Period. (The accompanying insert is no more than a souvenir.) Once out of its sarcophagus, all bets are off.

"... the potential registry set rating remains unaffected."  This erudite assertion coming from someone whom, to my knowledge, has never posted a coin or participated in any Set Registry I am aware of. Nonsense, and the tens of thousands of Set Registrants who occupy the highest rankings in their respective areas of interest know accept this as irrefutable fact. 

[zadok]

On 1/25/2024 at 9:16 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Ordinarily, I would not dignify a response to ill-informed doggerel spouted by a junk dealer whose forte is scap metal, but a cogent retort is all but required.  Consider this:  an encapsulated coin is removed from its holder, thereby losing its certification, its position on a census of certified coins and a Set Registry -- and the poseur has the unmitigated, colossal gall to insist that, having compromised the integrity of its vaunted status, has NOT been decertified, because, after all, it can always be resubmitted. Really! Balderdash!  It reverts to being a raw coin. Period. (The accompanying insert is no more than a souvenir.) Once out of its sarcophagus, all bets are off.

"... the potential registry set rating remains unaffected."  This erudite assertion coming from someone whom, to my knowledge, has never posted a coin or participated in any Set Registry I am aware of. Nonsense, and the tens of thousands of Set Registrants who occupy the highest rankings in their respective areas of interest know accept this as irrefutable fact. 

...total garbage...u obviously have no concept of how the certification n cross over process works, which is a good thing, just that much less u can muddle up....i have on numerous occasions resubmitted crossed-over coins to the original tpgs n had them re-certified, ever hear of photography?...ever wonder why the tpgs's photograph coins?... and u of one n one half registry sets r going to espouse opinions on registry sets to me?...what a charade...u know running around looking up big words to use in ur missives doesnt mean u know what the words mean, even a bigger charade....

[Henri Charriere]

" Better to Remain Silent, and Be Thought a Fool, than to Speak and Remove all Doubt."    #16

***

Back on Track:   To reiterate, ALL the information I need in order to proceed with an acquisition may be summarized in the following examples:

1900 NGC MS-67. or. 1914  NGC  MS-67

To date, no "original" (1899-1906) French 20-franc Gold Rooster has been certified as MS-67 and only a handful have been graded MS-66.  The line of completion stops at MS-64 at every reputable TPGS known to man.  The exact opposite is true for the "restrike" line where fine examples of the best of the best are available, albeit in small numbers.

But what about price?  Luster?  And all the other myriad attributions plaguing collectors and depriving them of a good night's sleep???  To me, of no moment.

I wish to thank member Woods020 (by whatever user name now known) for providing this critical, little-known tidbit, in substance, as follows:  if you are buying a coin that advertises a "Return policy," as well as a reasonable time frame within which to return a purchase that does not meet your expectations and full satisfaction, have no fear, your purchase is not "sight-unseen," but falls squarely within the realm of "sight-seen."

I should also like to thank member Just Bob for defining, in layman's terms, supply and demand, a relatively simple concept which eluded my own brother who regrettably collected all manner of things, only to die intestate in the worst room, in the worst public shelter, in the the worst neighborhood in the City of New York.   It was then I realized much of what he termed rare and priceless which I had no legal access to -- was interesting, but essentially worthless. 🐓 

 

[Henri Charriere]

Corrections and Amplifications

An astute member of the United Ancient Order of Druids has discreetly brought to my attention the following misstatement which requires action on my part, as regarding the prior post.

it was member @James_OldeTowne who expounded at length on the distinction between "sight-seen" and "sight-unseen," as it relates to buying on the internet.  Photos, however clear and detailed, in the absence of in-hand inspection, do not count whether they are provided, or not.

It was @Woods020 who, in a column dated 12/15/2020, stated:  "... read more, submit less, and question everything."  Wise counsel.

I suspect the venerable @VKurtB enjoys the large following he has is not because he watches Sanford & Son re-runs to bone up on commodities, but because the very fiber of his being forged during his many years serving the government, with distinction, has encouraged him to be direct with others as encapsulated in the classic retort:  "I would rather be right, than nice.  Has he ever been wrong?  Yes, and he owned up to it immediately and publicly -- not in a PM.  Not everyone deserves to be around you. Any member who furthers your knowledge and enhances your experience in the hobby, is a friend.

[VKurtB]

On 1/27/2024 at 6:10 PM, Henri Charriere said:

Corrections and Amplifications

An astute member of the United Ancient Order of Druids has discreetly brought to my attention the following misstatement which requires action on my part, as regarding the prior post.

it was member @James_OldeTowne who expounded at length on the distinction between "sight-seen" and "sight-unseen," as it relates to buying on the internet.  Photos, however clear and detailed, in the absence of in-hand inspection, do not count whether they are provided, or not.

It was @Woods020 who, in a column dated 12/15/2020, stated:  "... read more, submit less, and question everything."  Wise counsel.

I suspect the venerable @VKurtB enjoys the large following he has is not because he watches Sanford & Son re-runs to bone up on commodities, but because the very fiber of his being forged during his many years serving the government, with distinction, has encouraged him to be direct with others as encapsulated in the classic retort:  "I would rather be right, than nice.  Has he ever been wrong?  Yes, and he owned up to it immediately and publicly -- not in a PM.  Not everyone deserves to be around you. Any member who furthers your knowledge and enhances your experience in the hobby, is a friend.

There are things I opine upon based on what I’ve read, whether in an article or by high minded “research”, I find that causes frequent misstatements. Then again, there are opinions driven by getting on an airplane and seeing things in person WITHOUT ANY RELUCTANCE WHATSOEVER to ask probing questions (also a result of my state government service) when there. I try to maximize my first-person exposure to numismatic information. I leave for the Berlin Coin Fair in 36 hours. First person experience, unencumbered by a spousal unit. 

[zadok]

On 1/27/2024 at 8:03 PM, VKurtB said:

There are things I opine upon based on what I’ve read, whether in an article or by high minded “research”, I find that causes frequent misstatements. Then again, there are opinions driven by getting on an airplane and seeing things in person WITHOUT ANY RELUCTANCE WHATSOEVER to ask probing questions (also a result of my state government service) when there. I try to maximize my first-person exposure to numismatic information. I leave for the Berlin Coin Fair in 36 hours. First person experience, unencumbered by a spousal unit. 

...u best hope ur locks havent been changed upon ur return...

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 1/27/2024 at 8:03 PM, VKurtB said:

I leave for the Berlin Coin Fair in 36 hours. First person experience, unencumbered by a spousal unit. 

Are there any specific coins that you'll be looking for? 

 

[VKurtB]

On 1/28/2024 at 9:12 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

Are there any specific coins that you'll be looking for? 

 

I have three days at the Coin Fair. My concentration on Groundhog Day, the first day, is world mints. I will be concentrating on my main countries there; Japan, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and other non-euro European countries. There are 50 world mints on the bourse floor. On 3 Feb, the second day, I will be concentrating on the minting process, the actual machine vendors. Then on 4 Feb, I will be perusing “regular” coin dealers, looking mostly to gather up some holes in my pre-Elizabethan shillings and half crowns. I also hope to snag a really high grade 1965 Churchill crown and a non-PL 1960 crown in “sick great” condition. Otherwise, it’s an eyeball grabbing hunt. 

Edited January 28 by VKurtB

[zadok]

On 1/28/2024 at 10:43 AM, VKurtB said:

I have three days at the Coin Fair. My concentration on Groundhog Day, the first day, is world mints. I will be concentrating on my main countries there; Japan, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and other non-euro European countries. There are 50 world mints on the bourse floor. On 3 Feb, the second day, I will be concentrating on the minting process, the actual machine vendors. Then on 4 Feb, I will be perusing “regular” coin dealers, looking mostly to gather up some holes in my pre-Elizabethan shillings and half crowns. I also hope to snag a really high grade 1965 Churchill crown and a non-PL 1960 crown in “sick great” condition. Otherwise, it’s an eyeball grabbing hunt. 

...sounds like both a tactical n strategic plan...those churchill crowns r much like the ike dollars....

[VKurtB]

On 1/28/2024 at 12:25 PM, zadok said:

...sounds like both a tactical n strategic plan...those churchill crowns r much like the ike dollars....

Yep, early wear, and bag mark area is the eyebrows. Find a Churchill crown with pristine eyebrows and you’re “cooking with gas”. I never see great ones stateside. I do see better ones “across the pond”, I’m looking for a TRULY pristine example. Ironically, the best one I’ve found so far was in an antique shop’s coin case in Inverness, Scotland 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿, just a block from the river Ness. 

Edited January 29 by VKurtB

[VKurtB]

I’m considering a train trip to either Dresden or Leipzig before the Coin Fair starts. Leipzig speaks to me to visit the grave of Johann Sebastian Bach. 

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/28/2024 at 8:31 PM, VKurtB said:

I’m considering a train trip to either Dresden or Leipzig before the Coin Fair starts. Leipzig speaks to me to visit the grave of Johann Sebastian Bach. 

Godspeed!

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/24/2024 at 9:53 PM, VKurtB said:

Frequently total mintage, based on the idea that unless there has been a documented melting, all coins are somewhere. 

[I had to come back and think this over. "Documented melting" is problematic.  Not all meltings are documented. I believe many old copper pennies and 90% silver content coinage was melted -- and there are a 100 million gold roosters whose present whereabouts, particularly the earlier ones, 1899-1906, are unknown.  Who knows how many were smuggled out during the chaos of civil disturbances and war. (I have an open-ended standing reward offer of $500, over and above FMV for the three I have expressed an interest in buying with no takers in over a year.  N o t  o n e  p e e p!)]  

[Henri Charriere]

On 1/20/2024 at 10:39 AM, RWB said:

Here are my buying criteria. They are likely very different than those of others.

1^st – Is the coin special in some way relating to numismatic research?

 

2^nd – Is it unique or readily available?

 

3^rd – Is it of superior quality with respect to the features that make it a research subject, or supporting evidence.

 

4^th – Cost to acquire. Is this possible?

 

5^th – Is it likely to increase in value or should it be disposed of quickly?

 

Time availing in the near future, I would appreciate your in depth insight into how each of the above criteria figured in your decision to acquire the Crown 1847 Victoria Gothic proof, as disclosed elsewhere if you are so inclined.

[RWB]

On 2/6/2024 at 7:12 PM, Henri Charriere said:

I would appreciate your in depth insight into how each of the above criteria figured in your decision to acquire the Crown 1847 Victoria Gothic proof, as disclosed elsewhere if you are so inclined.

I was reviewing the origins of the young portraits and combinations made with language and font styles. Back then I could not find photos of sufficient quality and resolution to allow me to examine hand engraving details. Sooo...I saved by pennies ,,,errrr "cents" and eventually found a beautiful proof with just a little nice toning. That allowed me to complete what I was working on. The coin was so attractive that I decided to keep it. It always gets an admiring look whenever I visit the bank box. (I have a medal from sculptor Heidi Wastweet that's in the same category -- except it was bought solely for its magnificence.)