I can't post on the CU forum re the BigE threads, but feel this is important..

[MarkFeld]

If I understand the facts correctly, a collector bid on and won an uncertified Proof No Motto Dollar in a Stack's sale for $9200, on a sight-unseen basis. That amount is more than PR64's typically sell for and less than PR65's bring. And NGC ended up grading the coin PR66, making the coin "worth" $20,000 plus.

 

On one hand, I'm happy for the buyer. On the other hand, I wish the coin had graded PR64 or less or no-graded. Despite the very favorable result, and the fact that bidders obviously have the right to do as they please with their money, I believe that it is reckless gambling/unwise to bid on such coins on a sight unseen basis. And I fear that due to the results (which clearly went against very large odds) and publicity, other collectors will be emboldened and do the same thing themselves.

 

The fact that this particular coin ended up grading (as opposed to no-grading) and grading as high as it did, in no way diminishes the importance of bidding on and buying coins on a sight seen basis, particularly when they are of high value and/or uncertified and/or are being sold in a public auction without a return privilege.

[MunkyMan95]

Well, he got a 'gift' of a large tax refund check, and he decided to gamble with it. They don't always turn out as well as this one did.

[123cents]

I agree with your comments Mark. The funny thing about this coin is that the live bidders that were able to view the coin must have not thought that the coin would even grade PR-65. If they did, I am sure the bids would have gone higher.

[WoodenJefferson]

PR-66 with a thumb print?

 

He threw the dice this time and did not *spoon* out.

 

Will it happen again? The casinos have not survived all these years by loosing money, the odds are in both cases, your going to loose in the end.

 

I'm happy for him anyway...every hard core collector needs a big break every now and then.

[gmarguli]

I read the entire thread ATS and couldn't disagree more.

 

We take calculated risks every second of our lives. Why should coins be any different? BigE based his bid level on several factors including (perhaps most importantly) his tolerance for monetary loss, the picture of the coin, Stack's reputation and history of not slabbing material, current market values for the higher grade, the under grade, the suspected grade, and the no grade, and he took them all and figured a price that he was OK with risking.

 

I honestly believe that 98% of the dealers whoring out their services for their 5% couldn't tell a PF65 from PF66 without an insert. Slabs make stupid people smart.... and allow them to charge 5%.

 

BigE had the balls to play and he won. Where are all those 5% dealers with this coin? If they're so smart, why didn't they buy it? After all, if you're going to pay them 5%, shouldn't they have a solid idea as to what the coin would grade if submitted to a TPG?

 

And the idea that all the nice coins are in slabs already is a myth. Raw doesn't necessarily mean problem coin.

[MarkFeld]

I read the entire thread ATS and couldn't disagree more.

 

We take calculated risks every second of our lives. Why should coins be any different? BigE based his bid level on several factors including (perhaps most importantly) his tolerance for monetary loss, the picture of the coin, Stack's reputation and history of not slabbing material, current market values for the higher grade, the under grade, the suspected grade, and the no grade, and he took them all and figured a price that he was OK with risking.

 

I honestly believe that 98% of the dealers whoring out their services for their 5% couldn't tell a PF65 from PF66 without an insert. Slabs make stupid people smart.... and allow them to charge 5%.

 

BigE had the balls to play and he won. Where are all those 5% dealers with this coin? If they're so smart, why didn't they buy it? After all, if you're going to pay them 5%, shouldn't they have a solid idea as to what the coin would grade if submitted to a TPG?

 

And the idea that all the nice coins are in slabs already is a myth. Raw doesn't necessarily mean problem coin.

Greg, without addressing your other points at this time, I know that you know no one can grade Proof coins to any meaningful degree of accuracy based upon images. That, alone, makes most of your argument moot. And I'm sure you could disagree a lot more if you care to think about it and are willing to admit it.

[physics-fan3.14]

Could you post a link so those of us who only read here can see.

 

I agree with Greg.

 

Judging from what I see here, I see no problem with what happened. If this guy knew what he was doing, and felt confident grading from a picture, then he was certainly justified in buying this coin (Stack's reputation helped too.) Just because most people can't grade doesn't mean that they all can't.

[MarkFeld]

Could you post a link so those of us who only read here can see.

 

I agree with Greg.

 

Judging from what I see here, I see no problem with what happened. If this guy knew what he was doing, and felt confident grading from a picture, then he was certainly justified in buying this coin (Stack's reputation helped too.) Just because most people can't grade doesn't mean that they all can't.

I will repeat : No one can grade Proof coins to any meaningful degree of accuracy based upon images.

 

Link to original thread: see here

[MarkFeld]

I read the entire thread ATS and couldn't disagree more.

 

We take calculated risks every second of our lives. Why should coins be any different? BigE based his bid level on several factors including (perhaps most importantly) his tolerance for monetary loss, the picture of the coin, Stack's reputation and history of not slabbing material, current market values for the higher grade, the under grade, the suspected grade, and the no grade, and he took them all and figured a price that he was OK with risking.

 

I honestly believe that 98% of the dealers whoring out their services for their 5% couldn't tell a PF65 from PF66 without an insert. Slabs make stupid people smart.... and allow them to charge 5%.

 

BigE had the balls to play and he won. Where are all those 5% dealers with this coin? If they're so smart, why didn't they buy it? After all, if you're going to pay them 5%, shouldn't they have a solid idea as to what the coin would grade if submitted to a TPG?

 

And the idea that all the nice coins are in slabs already is a myth. Raw doesn't necessarily mean problem coin.

Greg, to be clear, are you saying you "couldn't disagree more" with my original statement below?:

 

The fact that this particular coin ended up grading (as opposed to no-grading) and grading as high as it did, in no way diminishes the importance of bidding on and buying coins on a sight seen basis, particularly when they are of high value and/or uncertified and/or are being sold in a public auction without a return privilege.

[MikeKing]

I read the entire thread ATS and couldn't disagree more.

 

We take calculated risks every second of our lives. Why should coins be any different? BigE based his bid level on several factors including (perhaps most importantly) his tolerance for monetary loss, the picture of the coin, Stack's reputation and history of not slabbing material, current market values for the higher grade, the under grade, the suspected grade, and the no grade, and he took them all and figured a price that he was OK with risking.

 

I honestly believe that 98% of the dealers whoring out their services for their 5% couldn't tell a PF65 from PF66 without an insert. Slabs make stupid people smart.... and allow them to charge 5%.

 

BigE had the balls to play and he won. Where are all those 5% dealers with this coin? If they're so smart, why didn't they buy it? After all, if you're going to pay them 5%, shouldn't they have a solid idea as to what the coin would grade if submitted to a TPG?

 

And the idea that all the nice coins are in slabs already is a myth. Raw doesn't necessarily mean problem coin.

 

I think Greg makes a good point about wheeler dealers who were able to see the coin and not recognize its capacity to grade.

 

edited to add: But I don't think the word 'whoring' would apply to all dealers who charge 5% for helping out a client who can't make it to the auction.

 

[MarkFeld]

I read the entire thread ATS and couldn't disagree more.

 

We take calculated risks every second of our lives. Why should coins be any different? BigE based his bid level on several factors including (perhaps most importantly) his tolerance for monetary loss, the picture of the coin, Stack's reputation and history of not slabbing material, current market values for the higher grade, the under grade, the suspected grade, and the no grade, and he took them all and figured a price that he was OK with risking.

 

I honestly believe that 98% of the dealers whoring out their services for their 5% couldn't tell a PF65 from PF66 without an insert. Slabs make stupid people smart.... and allow them to charge 5%.

 

BigE had the balls to play and he won. Where are all those 5% dealers with this coin? If they're so smart, why didn't they buy it? After all, if you're going to pay them 5%, shouldn't they have a solid idea as to what the coin would grade if submitted to a TPG?

 

And the idea that all the nice coins are in slabs already is a myth. Raw doesn't necessarily mean problem coin.

 

I think Greg makes a good point about wheeler dealers who were able to see the coin and not recognize its capacity to grade.

There will be exceptions that go against the (big) odds and there is an element of good or bad luck involved, as well. However, I will gladly always take the collective opinions of experts (as well as non-experts) who have examined a coin on a sight seen basis, over the (roll of the dice) gamble by a person who is going by images, alone.

[Shortgapbob-migration]

It was a very good result, but that is an awful lot of risk to take buying a coin like that virtually sight unseen. Problems like hairlines can be hidden so easily in pictures.

[braddick]

If I understand the facts correctly, a collector bid on and won an uncertified Proof No Motto Dollar in a Stack's sale for $9200, on a sight-unseen basis. That amount is more than PR64's typically sell for and less than PR65's bring. And NGC ended up grading the coin PR66, making the coin "worth" $20,000 plus.

 

On one hand, I'm happy for the buyer. On the other hand, I wish the coin had graded PR64 or less or no-graded. Despite the very favorable result, and the fact that bidders obviously have the right to do as they please with their money, I believe that it is reckless gambling/unwise to bid on such coins on a sight unseen basis. And I fear that due to the results (which clearly went against very large odds) and publicity, other collectors will be emboldened and do the same thing themselves.

 

The fact that this particular coin ended up grading (as opposed to no-grading) and grading as high as it did, in no way diminishes the importance of bidding on and buying coins on a sight seen basis, particularly when they are of high value and/or uncertified and/or are being sold in a public auction without a return privilege.

 

--------------------

Mark Feld

" I wish the coin had graded PR64 or less or no-graded"

 

 

I (guess I) can understand Mark you not wanting BigE to make money on this deal, but why would you wish upon him to loose money?

[gmarguli]

Greg, without addressing your other points at this time, I know that you know no one can grade Proof coins to any meaningful degree of accuracy based upon images. That, alone, makes most of your argument moot. And I'm sure you could disagree a lot more if you care to think about it and are willing to admit it.

 

I agree you cannot fully grade proof coins from an image. However, you can rule out certain grades based on marks you can see. Admittedly the hairlines are the "silent killer", but that is only one part of the calculated risk. However, I strongly believe that this does not make my argument moot. It's just one more variable to factor into the equation.

 

 

 

Greg, to be clear, are you saying you "couldn't disagree more" with my original statement below?:

 

Yes. Your post is basically your opinion that the buyer did this the wrong way and you wished he had lost so it would not encourage others. I feel the exact opposite. The buyer didn't do it the optimal way and they didn't do it in a way you would have, but they did it a fully acceptable way. They (presumable) factored in the risks and were OK with going forward. They were willing to accept the hit if it failed. The fact that their risk tolerance is higher than yours does not mean that they were wrong in their thinking.

 

 

 

There will be exceptions that go against the (big) odds and there is an element of good or bad luck involved, as well. However, I will gladly always take the collective opinions of experts (as well as non-experts) who have examined a coin on a sight seen basis, over the (roll of the dice) gamble by a person who is going by images, alone.

 

Of course. However, that doesn't mean the people who take a calculated gamble do so wrongly.

[jom]

However, that doesn't mean the people who take a calculated gamble do so wrongly.

 

I disagree. Forgetting about the 5% "dealer whores" and slabbing for a moment, it is just STUPID to buy a coin sight UNSEEN with NO return privilege. Just because the guy has so much money it didn't matter to him that he could have lost 90% of his cost doesn't mean it was the right way to go about it.

 

I think someone should buy coins because they like them, not whether or not it's AT or NT, or whether it's MS65 or not, or whether David Hall says so in his monthly newsletter. However, you can't tell whether you like a coin without seeing the damn thing or at least getting a "whore" to look at it for you. I realize anyone can do whatever they please with their money but if this guy wants to throw his money away he might as well just write me a check. I'll cash it...

 

jom

[MAULEMALL]

First off,I can't post across the street either and am glad no one went stoopid when you brought this over here..

 

 

That being said,Congrats to BIG E,,,,That took some serious stones... Could I or more importantly would I ever do it ,,,HELL NO, I am just THAT insecure in my abilities. But That all falls on ME...

 

Did any one on this Board see the coin at the Stacks auction and if you did and passed, Could you please explain why you passed.

 

 

As a side thought, When I was growing up $9.000 was a middle class yearly wage...

Now it seems you get that as a Tax return...

 

 

Big E ,, again congrats...And Good job yanking the chains ATS

[ldhair]

I'm really happy for BigE but what a gamble. I hope other collectors are not encouraged to take such risk just because of his results. In this situation, he won against crazy odds and we all know that's not the normal.

 

I know BigE could have and I hope others that decide to take such risk can deal with the losses that come with it.

 

We all gamble just a bit with this hobby but some risk are just not necessary.

[MarkFeld]

If I understand the facts correctly, a collector bid on and won an uncertified Proof No Motto Dollar in a Stack's sale for $9200, on a sight-unseen basis. That amount is more than PR64's typically sell for and less than PR65's bring. And NGC ended up grading the coin PR66, making the coin "worth" $20,000 plus.

 

On one hand, I'm happy for the buyer. On the other hand, I wish the coin had graded PR64 or less or no-graded. Despite the very favorable result, and the fact that bidders obviously have the right to do as they please with their money, I believe that it is reckless gambling/unwise to bid on such coins on a sight unseen basis. And I fear that due to the results (which clearly went against very large odds) and publicity, other collectors will be emboldened and do the same thing themselves.

 

The fact that this particular coin ended up grading (as opposed to no-grading) and grading as high as it did, in no way diminishes the importance of bidding on and buying coins on a sight seen basis, particularly when they are of high value and/or uncertified and/or are being sold in a public auction without a return privilege.

 

--------------------

Mark Feld

" I wish the coin had graded PR64 or less or no-graded"

 

 

I (guess I) can understand Mark you not wanting BigE to make money on this deal, but why would you wish upon him to loose money?

Pat, my first choice would be for BigE to lose a small amount of money on the coin, but enough to dissuade him (and others who were aware of what happened) from buying coins like that on a sight-unseen basis in the future. But, if that wouldn't do the job and it would take a no-grade (and let's not forget that wouldn't make the coin "worth" nothing) to accomplish the same thing, I think I'd be for it.

 

I have talked to BigE in the past and genuinely like him. But I think what he did was reckless and fear that his great luck in beating huge odds will encourage others to try the same. That, to me, would be a very bad result for this entire episode.

 

I agree you cannot fully grade proof coins from an image. However, you can rule out certain grades based on marks you can see. Admittedly the hairlines are the "silent killer", but that is only one part of the calculated risk. However, I strongly believe that this does not make my argument moot. It's just one more variable to factor into the equation.

Greg, with respect to images of a Proof coin, it is often impossible to tell if the coin grades 63 or 67. And, far more frequently than not, it is those "silent killer" hairlines which determine the grade. The significance of that unknown will usually trump any of the other risk factors you mentioned.

 

To anyone else who is reading this thread or the others - there have been a number of disparaging comments aimed at dealers and the (approximate) 5% fee they charge to screen auction coins for clients. Please keep in mind, that in most cases there is no charge, whatsoever to the client if he doesn't end up actually winning the lot.

 

Dealers often spend considerable time viewing lots but recommending that clients not bid on various coins. That results in zero compensation to the dealer. Ditto if the client decides to pursue the coin, but is unsuccessful.

 

Please don't let some of the ancillary issues which have been raised distract you from the central topic at hand - you are going against huge odds by bidding on/buying coins sight unseen. It is (usually) even more risky/dangerous when the coins are of high value and/or uncertified and/or are being sold in an auction without a return privilege.

[bsshog40]

Lot of opinions on this subject for sure. Mine, I don't think it's good practice to buy sight unseen. Of course when people want what they pay for, they will not take these chances. Other's may have the type of finances to take gambles. There's alot that do it in casinos. People bid on Cards in blackjack without seeing the next card, not much difference here. Someone taking a gamble because they can. I don't think that this type of transaction would start a trend. Most coin buyers have the common sense it takes to purchase coins. Anyone that buys from ebay takes chances all the time going by poor images, false grades, and deceptive descriptions. This person came out ahead and all I can say about that is, "lucky you and congrats". I don't wish anyone bad luck with purchasing a coin. We all have taken a gamble at least once I'm sure. Just because some have become more conservative than others is no need to condemn those who take risks. It's human nature to take risks now and then. You might get hurt, you might not. That's why they call it a risk!

[gmarguli]

To anyone else who is reading this thread or the others - there have been a number of disparaging comments aimed at dealers and the (approximate) 5% fee they charge to screen auction coins for clients. Please keep in mind, that in most cases there is no charge, whatsoever to the client if he doesn't end up actually winning the lot.

 

Then there is even more of a conflict of interest there. If the dealer is only going to get paid if the client buys the coin, then they may give a slightly less than honest opinion. Wait, what am I thinking, this hobby is filled with saints and no coin dealer would ever do that!

 

I have nothing against some dealers charging a fee to screen auction lots and believe it can be a valuable service. However, I feel the vast majority of them do not have the skills to nail the grade or tell originality. Some high end dealers I find their skills/ethics lacking. Even some ex-TPG graders (not talking about you) I'd never trust to look at a coin.

 

None of this negates the fact that if you know the risks and can handle the potential losses, you can buy sight unseen. A risk is a risk regardless if it is buying a coin sight unseen or a penny stock or betting on 17 Red.

[chinook]

As big as that thread is ATS, I believe there is alot that has not been said.

[Dcoin]

I'm still waiting to see a picture of the holder? Seems like a lot of smoke and mirrors went up, but in reality nobody has seen the proof (pun intended).

[WoodenJefferson]

First off,I can't post across the street either and am glad no one went stoopid when you brought this over here..

 

"no one went stoopid"

 

I feel that this statement, being "stoopid" was directed specifically at me in regards to you starting a thread from ATS about people being possibly banned over there for something they posted and then several forum members indicated an indifference to the relativity to Numismatics. Well, I was one of those who "went stoopid" on you. Eventually your entire thread was pulled for obvious reasons. First of all, I have already replied to this thread and spoke my opinion. Had I felt it not worthy to our hobby, I would not have responded in the manner in which I did.

 

1. The topic deals directly with Numismatic endeavors.

2. There is a particular Numismatic coin involved.

3. The point of the entire subject matter has direct links to decision making process when purchasing a Numismatic coin.

4. Mark brought this forward in the Tangents section, a general topics area of chat and not a dedicated forum devoted to US Coins.

4. A forum member asked that a link be provided, the OP obliged so there would be no confusion.

5. Through debate, there may be a lesson to be learned in this thread, regardless of where, who or how it originated.

 

There is a difference to idle gossip and a lesson to be learned while in the making. Had you posted that pulled thread over here in the Tangents section, the outcome would probably have been entirely different and members or a member wouldn't have went off "stoopid" on behalf of ethics.

 

You of all people should know that.

 

Now, I am following this topic here and have abandoned the one ATS because it has spawned another hate thread and the original thread has taken an ugly turn and has evolved into yet another fiasco.

 

At least the following debate shows we can be civilized and all get along, imparting advice and opinions as we progress...in my opinion, prodding the bull is not a good idea.

[MarkFeld]

I'm still waiting to see a picture of the holder? Seems like a lot of smoke and mirrors went up, but in reality nobody has seen the proof (pun intended).

I don't need to see a picture of the holder to believe Eric - why do you?

[MAULEMALL]

Keep your Stalinesque paranoia to your self wj and quit derailing other peoples threads.

 

 

I asked yesterday and I ask again if Any one here had the opportunity to see the coin in person and if they rejected it, Why?

[Stanley]

IMO …Below are 2 quotes pulled directly from the post ATS.

 

“I need expert counseling!!!!!!!!!!!! Do you think I did OK Be brutally honest--------------I figured tax day would be a good time to get a deal since I have always wanted one of these---------BigE”

 

“Andy, I have never returned a coin. I suppose I would send it back if it was totally misrepresented----------------BigE “

 

There is nothing said to convince me that this was a reckless gamble.

The man bought something he had always wanted with his own money.

It also appears that he was relying on the reputation of the seller and in the second quote: “Andy, I have never returned a coin. I suppose I would send it back if it was totally misrepresented----------------BigE”

 

I see nothing strange about this, however I suppose it makes for a good discussion.

[James_OldeTowne]

Can anyone please accurately summarize the thread in question? I don't know if I can read 400+ pages.

 

Mark, feel free to quote or link to the WYNTK article I wrote on "sight-seen vs. sight-unseen".

 

Although I do not recommend buying any coin sight-unseen as a general practice, the gambler in all of use probably prevails from time to time. Some of the biggest scores for me have come on sight-unseen purchases. Likewise, I've lost my shirt on others. Overall, though, I'd guess I've come out well ahead, though I don't have numbers to prove it.

 

When all is said and done, it's probably a good learning experience to gamble (sensibly) once in a while, and win and lose some.

[gmarguli]

Can anyone please accurately summarize the thread in question? I don't know if I can read 400+ pages.

 

BigE bought an expensive coin sight-unseen in an auction.

 

Many people chastised him for not having a dealer look at it first. After all, the "experts" on the floor let him win it since they knew more.

 

Many people feel it's his money and he can take the risk if he likes.

 

Coin grades PF66 making it a major home run for him - probably a $15,000 profit.

 

Many people still chastise him for not having a dealer look at it first and feel it was 100% pure luck. They feel you can never buy sight-unseen - even if you know the risks and place your bid accordingly - as the "experts" at the auction will always end up winning over you.

 

Many people congratulate him for having the balls to take a risk.

 

A few people question the outcome if it really graded PF66 or not.

 

Final Analysis: Some people accept risk and have balls. Some people don't accept the risk and don't have balls. Some "experts" want their 5% regardless of their abilities.

[DirtyGoldMan]

If the dealer is only going to get paid if the client buys the coin, then they may give a slightly less than honest opinion. Wait, what am I thinking, this hobby is filled with saints and no coin dealer would ever do that!

 

I have had dealers review dozens of coins for me, and I would estimate that we have bid on a small percentage, maybe 10%, and have won at most five. The 5% representation fee is one of the best deals in numismatics.

 

BTW, I have even had a dealer bid on a coin for me at a live auction when I was sitting in the back of the room.

[James_OldeTowne]

Greg, THANKS for your amazingly concise distillation ! Seriously, you about nailed it.

 

I downloaded the entire 400+ page diatribe, because I couldn't tolerate trying to read it on-line. Here are the points that bother me:

 

1. It SEEMS as if, after BigE posed his question, he was almost immediately assualted (for lack of a better term) for foolishness, risk-taking, etc. SOME of this seems warranted. I get the impression he was bidding based purely on an image, and a description, and that is risky. On the other hand, of all the dealers and auction firms that I personally would trust, Stack's is one of them. So I think the level of the "assault" was a bit over the top. It was especially inappropriate for dealers to snap at him, as it appears they did (and I won't mention any names).

 

Again, based on personal experience, I would say I've scored more often than struck out bidding on un-certified coins in major auctions, and it's been a cumulative success for me. I don't go this route often, but it is admittedly fun, provided the amount of money is kept in check. I would definitely NOT bid $100,000 (like I have that much) on an un-certified coin if it was sight-unseen. $10,000 would be possible, depending on circumstances, and $1000 I would do if the mood struck.

 

2. After BigE turned out to have scored a home-run, I am amazed at how few "congratulatory" comments were posted. That wasn't just a home-run, it may have been a grand-slam! I don't know, it sounded almost like some of the dealers begrudged his success. I think a simple "good job" would have been appropriate. It was not appropriate to say that he was just "lucky", I don't think. That has a negative connotation, at least the way it seemed to be stated.

 

3. As SO often seems to happen ATS, 95% of the thread was garbage. Insults, innuendos, meaningless posts, etc, and then it degenerated into an absurd bout of name-calling. I am SO glad to be on the sane side of the street.

 

4. I am bothered by how many people over there just don't understand what "sight-unseen" means. So many seem to think that it's somehow safer to bid on a certified coin than uncertified "sight-unseen", but my experience has been that raw or certified doesn't matter. MAYBE you get burned more often on un-certified coins, but when I've gotten burned on a certified coin, I've gotten burned badly.

 

Finally, in closing, Mark, I was a tiny bit surprised that you wished BigE had lost on this gamble. I understand your reasons from your explanation, but I'm not quite comfortable that it was an appropriate statement.

 

All in all, I'd say the thread was a good read, but the nonsense just wasn't necessary.